Follow-up to Free Avvo Webinar: "Someone Online Hates You"

Last week, Brian Gottesman noted that Avvo.com has series of free webinars that can be viewed online, including “Someone Online Hates You,” which focuses on lawyers and their compliance with ethical obligations when dealing with negative online feedback. A recent disciplinary case in Illinois illustrates why attorneys need to be cautious.
 
In late August, the Administrator of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission filed a complaint against an attorney alleging professional misconduct for revealing client information in a response that she posted to a negative review on Avvo.com. The complaint is available here.

The attorney had represented the client in an employment security matter arising from his termination as an airline flight attendant. After the client lost the unemployment compensation case, he posted a negative review on Avvo.com, blaming the attorney:

She only wants your money, claims ‘always on your side’ is a huge lie. Paid her to help me secure unemployment, she took my money knowing full well a certain law in Illinois would not let me collect unemployment. [N]ow is billing me for an additional $1500 for her time.
 

The attorney posted the following response:

This is simply false. The person did not reveal all the facts of his situation up front in our first and second meeting. [sic] When I received his personnel file, I discussed the contents of it with him and informed him that he would likely lose unless the employer chose not to contest the unemployment (employers sometimes do is [sic]). Despite knowing that he would likely lose, he chose to go forward with a hearing to try to obtain benefits. I dislike it very much when my clients lose but I cannot invent positive facts for clients when they are not there. I feel badly for him but his own actions in beating up a female coworker are what caused the consequences he is now so upset about.
 

(Emphasis added.) Both the client’s review and the attorney’s response were subsequently replaced with more generic ones, which are available here.
 
In the complaint, the Administrator has alleged that the attorney violated three rules of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct—Rule 1.6(a) (revealing information relating to the representation of a client without the client’s informed consent); Rule 4.4 (using means in representing a client that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person); and 8.4(d) (conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice or that tends to defeat the administration of justice or to bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute).
 
The attorney, through her counsel, has denied the allegations and intends to defend the complaint.

Category: 

Tag: 

By: