Morning Briefing: Lawyers warned over LinkedIn profiles

by NZ Lawyer01 Apr 2015
Your LinkedIn profile could get you in trouble, lawyers association warns
The New York County Lawyers Association is warning that lawyers should be monitoring their LinkedIn profiles to ensure that they are not being endorsed for areas in which they do not have experience. Users of the site can be endorsed by any of their connections but the NYCLA’s ethics committee says that such endorsements could cause issues if left unchecked. In an opinion piece on its website the association advises lawyers to be mindful of the accuracy of biographies and written testimonials from contacts; highlighting that leaving them on the site could be seen as passing them off as correct. Additionally it says that some content on a user’s profile could be deemed as advertising and would need to comply with relevant restrictions.
 
First post merger revenues revealed by international law firm
Squire Patton Boggs has released its first revenue results since the merger of legacy firms Squire Sanders and Patton Boggs last year. Revenue for the year was US$870.5 million with net profits of US$129.5 million and profits per equity partner of US$841,000. The results are not for a full year as a merged firm as the two only became one in June 2014.
 
Baker & McKenzie wins negligence case
Baker & McKenzie was today cleared of a negligence claim brought by a German food company and its Mexican subsidiary. Symrise had claimed that the law firm and its Mexican office had given bad advice on a tax matter 12 years ago, which had landed the food company with a multi-million dollar tax bill. The High Court in London ruled that Bakers was not negligent and ordered the claimant to pay the law firm’s costs.
 
The ‘brand’ of solicitor could be damaged by paralegals 
Lawyers in the UK warn that paralegals who qualify as solicitors without completing a formal training contract could damage the ‘brand’. A survey by the Leeds Law Society shows that 60 per cent of the respondents were concerned that the rules allowing paralegals to be qualified if they have undertaken a legal practice course in three areas of law, would create a glut of supply of lawyers. It would also mean that not all ‘solicitors’ would have been trained under the same criteria. Just 27 per cent of respondents felt that this should be an allowable route to qualification. Nearly half thought it would have a negative impact on salaries.

COMMENTS

  • by Rob Miller 1/04/2015 11:33:42 a.m.

    A "legal practice course" of just three areas of law (whatever they are) is compared to a requirement of three Arts units plus sixteen areas of law to be passed while attending University before and after a full day's work as a Law Clerk would wreak havoc, not least with the service offered to the public.The profession as such would cease to exist.The person advancing the proposition needs to clarify it. Surely it cannot be as stupid in he form in which it is asked.