Tag-Archive for » LinkedIn «

According to the salary guide released by Robert Half Legal, 2013 should see an increase in paralegal salaries by 3.1 to 3.9 %, depending on the size of the firm you work for.  You can get a copy of their salary guide here.

You can also use their salary calculator to obtain salaries in your local area as well and check out the hiring trends, not only in your area but nationwide and you can check out the fastest growing industries locally and nationwide as well.

legal positions 2013

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

In a recent article in Law.com’s Law Technology News section, Robert J. Ambroji discussed Social Media and Ethics for those of us in law.

Ethics and social media will be front and center at the American Bar Association’s annual meeting this month in its hometown, Chicago. The ABA’s House of Delegates — its governing body — will consider the recommendations of the ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20, which has proposed revisions to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to address changes in technology.

The ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20, reminds us that the same old ethical rules apply to Social Media.

Do not betray client confidence when you tweet or blog, even if you think you are being discreet. as Illinois assistant public defender Kristine Ann Peshek found out when her license was suspended for 60 days when she blogged about her clients.  Peshek thought she was blogging anonymously but it was determined that she had provided enough specific information on her clients that they could be identified.

Do not give out legal advice, this could be construed as forming an attorney-client relationship.  For us paralegals, this could be practicing law without a license.

Do not solicit clients.  Targeting a specific person to be a client is not allowed, but participating in an online forum of any kind is permitted.

ABA Model Rule 7.2 says, “A lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s services.” Does this mean you cannot provide an endorsement of a colleague on sites such as LinkedIn or Avvo? Absolutely not, provided nothing of value is exchanged.  But can you promise to provide an endorsement if the other attorney promises to endorse you in return?  That quid pro quo could be seen as an exchange of value.

As Mr. Ambroji says in his article, it all comes down to common sense.  If you wouldn’t talk about your client’s case with strangers outside of your office, why would you post it online?  If you wouldn’t give out legal advice at your neighbor’s party, why would you do it online?

To read more of the article written by Mr. Ambroji, you can find it here.  I would love to hear my fellow paralegals thoughts on Ethics and Social Media too.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

Last year a San Francisco Superior Court judge dismissed 600 potential jurors after several acknowledged going online to research the criminal case before them.

Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon challenged her misdemeanor embezzlement conviction after discovering five jurors “friended” one another on Facebook during the trial.

And a federal judge in Florida declared a mistrial after eight jurors admitted Web surfing about a drug case.

But the rules for jury service in state and federal courts alike are evolving to grapple with this 21st century issue. New jury instructions are being adopted and electronics are being banned from courtrooms.

In January, the federal court’s top administrative office, the Judicial Conference of the United States, issued so-called “Twitter instructions” to every federal judge, which are designed to be read to jurors at the start of the trial and before deliberations.

“You may not use any electronic device or media” in connection with the case, the recommended federal instructions admonish. They also bar visits to “any Internet chat room, blog, or website such as Facebook, My Space, LinkedIn, YouTube or Twitter.”

San Francisco Superior Court on Jan. 1 began including such instructions after some of the 600 jurors said they went online because there were no explicit prohibitions against such independent research.

“You may not do research about any issues involved in the case,” the new instruction states. “You may not blog, Tweet, or use the Internet to obtain or share information.”

A California legislator last month introduced a bill that would charge wayward jurors with a crime.  So, keep those cell phones off when in court, don’t friend any of the other jurors on Facebook and don’t tweet what is happening in court while you are sitting on the jury.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share