Re: DOMA

If you are in a firm knowledge about a case is imputed to you, even if you 
aren't working on it directly.  If knowledge is imputed to you you are bound by 
the attorney client privileged.  It would be very similar to a lawyer in a firm 
commenting that he thought another lawyer's (in the firm), client was guilty of 
a crime.  That would be unethical, a violation of attorney client privilege 
and/or confidentiality and just plain bad form.

I don't know where "having an opinion" came into this since we were never 
talking about merely having an opinion.  


Mike F.  




________________________________
From: Karl Swenson <[email protected]>
To: DADL (off topic) <[email protected]>
Sent: Mon, April 25, 2011 3:45:55 PM
Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] DOMA


If you hired a lawyer to represent you in a civil case, and his employees were 
going public opposing the case, would you feel his firm was acting ethically?
 
From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
[email protected]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 1:38 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] DOMA
 
>Has no one ever heard of the attorney client privilege?  It would unethical and 
>lawyers could >theoretically get disbarred or at least disciplined if people in 
>the firm, whether lawyers or not, >were talking about the case.  
>
 
I wasn't aware having an opinion (as opposed to speaking about the case-which is 
why I understood that part) about DOMA was an Attorney/Client Privilage issue.  

Thom
http://thomwade.wordpress.com/
http://www.cafepress.com/Thomwade
http://www.in-one-ear.com
_______________________________________
"I want a song to learn and sing, of a life requited."-Echo & the Bunnymen

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot