A very sad weekend. Before we use the event to advance political positions, I hope we find it in ourselves to spend a day, or even two, thinking about the victims and their friends & families.
50 people lost their lives. 50.
To me, for now, it doesn’t matter why, or who did it, or what we do to try to prevent another from happening. Rather, I’m struggling to wrap my head around the sheer number of people who won’t be arriving at work or class or wherever this morning. And more, the staggering number of friends, partners, moms, dads, brothers, sisters, children, nieces, nephews, and co-workers who lost someone they loved in an unspeakably horrific event. Most certainly without having had the chance to say goodbye.
The time will come to argue about what’s next. And it will come too soon. For now, compassion for those most devastatingly impacted is most important.
If you pray, pray for them. If you don’t pray, keep them in your thoughts. Because if we don’t, and if we use their unspeakable grief and agony to spin this for our own political purposes, we will turn on each other at a time when we should be doing the exact opposite.
Last week’s quiz is HERE.
Honor Roll (at least 4 correct, * = perfect score)
- Matt Anderson* Pratt Vreeland Kennelly & White
- Lauri Fisher * Kenney & Fisher
- Bob Grundstein
- Deb Kirchwey
- Team Liberty* ACLU of Connecticut, Vermont’s own Dan Barrett, captain
- Matthew Little
- Hal Miller, First American
- Kane Smart Downs Rachlin Martin
- Ben Traverse Downs Rachlin Martin
Last month, a new rule went into effect. It requires “timely reconciliation” of pooled interest-bearing trust accounts. Per the rule, what is “timely”?
- A. At a minimum, monthly; Rule 1.15A(a)(4)
- B. At a minimum, bi-monthly
- C. At a minimum, quarterly
- D. The rule doesn’t define “timely.” That’ll be up to the disciplinary prosecutors, hearing panels, and the Supreme Court.
Lawyer called me with an inquiry. I listened. Then, I said “if you talk to her, don’t say or do anything that might imply you’re disinterested.”
What did Lawyer call to discuss?
- A. Lawyer’s love life
- B. A potential conflict of interest
- C. Dealing with an unrepresented person. Rule 4.3
- D. An ex parte conversation with a judge
Attorney called with an inquiry. I responded by saying: “there are ‘end-product’ states, there are ‘work-product’ states, and there’s an ABA Formal Advisory Opinion that leans towards ‘end-product.’ Vermont’s rules don’t resolve the issue.”
Who owns the file/what portion of file is client entitled to. ABA Formal Opinion 471
This session, the Vermont Legislature passed a bill that, once signed, will make a fact or record verified by a certain type of technology “authentic” and admissible in court.
In April, the New York Times ran a piece in which it stated that the law firm Mossack Fonseca “was built on assurances of bulletproof privacy for its clients.” Of course, the article described a massive data breach that affected many of the firm’s clients.
What’s the phrase that has come to describe the firm’s client’s data that was breach and disclosed?