Select Page
Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 11

Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 11

Twitter, like many public-viewing social networking websites, is constructed so that those participants with the most “followers” gain the most attention from their posts, reach the most users, and are therefore seen as more knowledgeable, visible and important within...
Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 10

Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 10

The second problematic issue regarding social media as “advertising” and Model Rule 7.1 regards recommendations, endorsements and intentionally displayed social networking “connections” made by the lawyer.  When a lawyer invites such recommendations or online displays...
Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 8

Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 8

For instance, because a single Twitter posting is limited to 140 characters in total, a lawyer may not be able to include the state-specific disclosure and disclaimer requirements within the 140 character limit – effectively limiting him from using the site as a...
Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 7

Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 7

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING AND SOCIAL NETWORKING Perhaps the most obvious ethical conflict for a lawyer involved with social media is how that lawyer’s online presence might conflict with the Model Rules on Attorney Advertising.  Comment 3 to Rule 7.2 recognizes that...
Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 6

Social Networking: A Legal Ethics Minefield – Part 6

ARE THERE OTHER BENEFITS TO USING SOCIAL NETWORKING? Social networking sites have been an invaluable tool for many attorneys performing research on already contested matters.   For instance, if a matrimonial attorney wishes to view the Facebook page of a client’s...