Following is the 24th post in a series from Parker Taylor Law Group about recent changes to the California Bar Association (CBA)’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC). This rule is found in Chapter 1 – “Lawyer-Client Relationship” and focuses on “competence.” The Rule of Professional Conduct, as revised, is as follows: Rule 1.1 Competence (a) ...Read More
Following is the 23rd post in a series from Parker Taylor Law Group about recent changes to the California Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC). This rule is found in Chapter 1 – “Lawyer-Client Relationship” and focuses on a client’s confidential information. The Rule of Professional Conduct, as revised, is as follows: Rule 1.6 ...Read More
Following is the 22nd post in a series from Parker Taylor Law Group about recent changes to the California Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC). This rule is found in Chapter 6, which is titled “Public Service.” As a new rule, this is not simply a revision of a previous rule. CBA’s Rule 6.3...Read More
Following is the 21st post in a series about recent changes to the California Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC). This rule is found in Chapter 4, which is titled “Transactions with Persons Other than Clients.” As this is a new rule, it is not a revision of a previous rule. CBA’s Rule 4.4...Read More
Failing to assert something doesn’t always waive your right to do so later, but there are limitations. In the arbitration context, if you don’t compel arbitration up front, you risk losing your right to it entirety. In the recent case of Spracher v. Paul M. Zagaris, Inc. (1st Appellate Dist. Case No. A152941, September 17,...Read More
Lawyers often look at court decisions wondering if the judges are thinking through the practical applications of their rulings. While we know judges consider real-world application, the outcome of some cases makes it unclear how much stock is put into it. However, in a recent decision, the California Court of Appeal was explicit that it was...Read More
In Orozco v. WPV San Jose, LLC (6th Dist. Cal. App. H044014, June 19, 2019), plaintiff Paul Orozco opened Pauly’s Famous Franks N Fries in a San Jose shopping center named “The Plant,” which sold hot dogs and french fries. Before signing a 10-year commercial lease, he asked the leasing manager whether restaurants with competing...Read More
Following is the twelfth in a series of posts about recent changes to the California Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC), under the category of “Lawyer-Client Relations” – related to “special conflicts of interest for former and current government officials and employees.” As with other new RPC rules, Rule 1.11 does not directly correspond...Read More
Following is the eleventh in a series of posts about recent changes to the California Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC), under the category of “Lawyer-Client Relations” – related to “imputation of conflicts of interest.” As with Rules 1.2, 1.8.2, and 1.8.11 of the new RPC, Rule 1.10 does not directly correspond to any...Read More
Following is the tenth in a series of posts by Parker Taylor Law Group reflecting recent changes to the California Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC), under the category of “Lawyer-Client Relationship” – related to the “imputation of prohibitions under Rules 1.8.1 to 1.8.9.” The Rule of Professional Conduct is as follows: Rule 1.8.11...Read More
