The ConflictCheck magazine
Reporting on intake, conflicts rules, malpractice risk, and the economics of running a solo or two lawyer law firm in the United States.
practical guide
Your old matters only protect you if they are searchable. Here is how to pull names, adverse parties, and related entities out of ten years of closed files and into one index you can query in a minute.
checklist
A conflict you miss on the first call becomes a withdrawal letter three months later. This is the set of names, dates, and roles to capture while the prospective client is still on the phone.
regulation and compliance
A caller who never hires you can still disqualify you. Model Rule 1.18 sets the confidentiality owed to prospective clients and the narrow path back to representing the other side.
comparison
Not every current client conflict can be cured with a signed waiver. Rule 1.7(b) draws the line at four conditions, and two of them are judgment calls you make before you draft anything.
mistakes to avoid
Most failed conflict checks are not close calls. They are searches that covered only the client name, matters that were never logged, and declined calls that left no record at all.
case study
Follow one disqualification motion from the moving papers to the ruling. The substantial relationship test decides most of them, and the record you kept at intake usually decides the test.
numbers and benchmarks
Premiums are built from a small set of rating factors you can see and partly control. Here is how limits, deductibles, practice area mix, prior acts dates, and tail coverage move the number.
trends and outlook
The ABA opened the door to screening lateral hires in 2009, and the states have been splitting on it ever since. What the variations mean when a two lawyer firm brings someone new in.
field report
Most states run a free ethics hotline for members, and conflicts questions dominate the calls. How the service works, what protection the call gives you, and how to ask so the answer is useful.