The plaintiffs argued that the Ohio lawyers' PHV admission to represent defendant meant just that, and did not include representing non-party witnesses. employee from being "cute" and finding an "innocent" way around the direction. [Emphasis added.]. Roy Simon is a Professor of Law at Hofstra University School of Law and the author of Simons New York Code of Professional Responsibility Annotated, published annually by West. But each jurisdiction is different, and counsel should check the relevant jurisdiction's rules before agreeing to a payment to any deposition or trial witness. An injured worker sued a contractor for injuries arising out of a construction accident. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 148 (D.N.J. Communications between the Company's counsel and former employees may not be privileged. Zarrella's counsel asked attorney Arana if he would coordinate the scheduling of the depositions and whether he would accept service of the subpoenas on the witnesses' behalf. Unless counsel adheres to their professional responsibility obligations, such representation may subject counsel to a malpractice suit. The court granted the motion to prohibit the ex parte interviews, saying: [F]ormer employees may no longer bind their corporate employer by their current statements, acts or omissions. Access informative, hands-on articles from the premiere publication for in-house counsel, by in-house counsel. As an employee of a company which is a party to a lawsuit, you may be required by your employer to appear for a deposition. In its opinion the court analyzed both pro hac vice principles and the Golden States ethics rules on client solicitation. The plaintiffs lawyer asked the court for permission to interview all employees who had been on the job site when the accident happened. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers. Counsel must understand that agreeing to represent a former employee individually for purposes of a deposition may not necessarily protect all communications with that witness under the umbrella of attorney-client privilege. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. Toretto Dec. at 4 (DE 139-1). Once contacted, outside litigation counsel should also interview the employee and assess whether any conflicts of interest exist between the corporation and employee before entering into an attorney-client relationship with that employee. LEXIS 108229 (S.D. swgsm2wD~UH(>$(#7GqkkMJic\v;
%Vc
::Bj. Or they simply may not care what happens to the Company. She is a member of the Ohio Supreme Courts Commission on Professionalism, a former chair of the Certified Grievance Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, and a member and past chair of. The applicability of the no-contact rule to an adversarys former employees varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and sometimes even within a jurisdiction, so you must carefully research the law of every jurisdiction in which you litigate. Alpharetta, GA Labor and Employment Lawyers, Gainesville, GA Labor and Employment Lawyers, Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information. All other employees, the court said, may be interviewed informally. Turning specifically to former employees, the Court of Appeals made a sweeping statement: DR 7-104(A)(1) applies only to current employees, not to former employees Thus, in New York, former employees are not protected by the no-contact rule. Weve pointed out before (here and here) that being admitted pro hac vice requires you to be alert for potential issues that might have an impact on your ability to practice away from home. Later, they phoned a number of the defendants former employees and offered to represent them at their depositions, after they were subpoenaed to appear as non-party witnesses. The Law for Lawyers Today is a resource for law firms, law departments and lawyers needing information to meet the challenge of practicing ethically and responsibly. Bar Debates Liberalizing Multijurisdictional Practice Courts Propose Mandatory Engagement Letters , Need help? Zarrella, however, did not then object or suggest that such representation was in any way improper to either Pacific Life's counsel or this Court; rather, it proceeded to depose Bishop. Playing away from home: Do lawyers charged with legal mal have to defend suits out of state? Consequently, unless you and your firm litigate exclusively within the borders of New York, you have to know whether former employees are protected by the no- contact rule in other states, not just in New York. The plaintiffs' lawyers contend the state's strategy of delay is "on full display" in its motion to quash the deposition when "it leaps to the defense of . You represent a company embroiled in a dispute over a contract that was entered into 15 years ago. Lawyers from our extensive network are ready to answer your question. Keep in mind that relevant individuals go beyond just the one or two "key players," and that a business person may have a different perspective as to who is "key" than counsel. A Rule 30 (b) (6) notice must (1) provide the date, time, and place for taking the deposition; (2) specify the name and address of the entity being deposed; (3) set forth with reasonable particularity the matters for examination; (4) indicate the method by which the testimony will be recorded and whether documents are sought; and (5) be I am now being requested to give a video deposition in the case, representing my former firm. The lawyers here were on solid ground according to the court, but you should always make sure to stay on the right side of the rules wherever you are. Fla. Sept. 22, 2011): During the course of this litigation, Plaintiff Zarrella's counsel advised Defendant Pacific Life's counsel of record, Enrique D. Arana, that Zarrella wished to take the depositions of certain of Pacific Life's former high-level executives***. Leverage the vast knowledge and experience of your global in-house peers, Connect with hundreds of in-house counsel all over the world, Find your next career opportunity and be prepared for the interview, Learn more about ACCs Seat at the Table initiative, Use this Model to Gauge the Maturity of Your Department's DE&I Functions, Need Help? Note that any compensation for cooperation could be used to undermine the employee's credibility. . Ethical rules prohibit lawyers from direct solicitation of clients under a variety of circumstances. In fact, deposition testimony can also be used in court at trial. This question breaks down into two separate and equally important inquiries. Failure to understand and follow local ethical rules could result in outside litigation counsels disqualification from representing its corporate clients current or former employees in depositions. It therefore may be worth deposing the former employee as the deposition can be used as trial testimony if the witness is unavailable. Supplemental Terms. Retention of counsel can also provide former employees who lack experience with litigation greater confidence and willingness to cooperate. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page. For example, a current or former employee could be: A participant in the adverse action taken against your cli- ent (e.g., termination, demotion, decrease in pay, or hos-tile work environment) A witness to the adverse action or the emotional distress caused by the adverse action -or- But Arana recommended that O'Sullivan first obtain the advice of his current employer's in-house counsel before deciding whether he wished for Arana to represent him. Mr. William L. Sanders (Unclaimed Profile). Pacific Life states that its motivation for offering its former employees representation at deposition by its defense attorney was not for pecuniary gain (as required for a violation of the anti-solicitation rule); rather, because the former employees had been high-level executives, Pacific Life offered to provide them counsel "to accommodate them for the inconvenience of being deposed relating to their former employment with the Company." Obtain agreements to cooperate for key employees. This is abroad standard. Its five oclock somewhere: Lawyers working remotely from other jurisdictions during COVID-19, Censure serves as reminder that zealous advocacy is no excuse for lack of candor toward tribunal, New York says presumption for sharing confidential information in joint representations does not apply retroactively, Ohio clarifies when out-of-state lawyers are permitted to conduct and defend depositions, Supreme Court Ultimately Declines to Decide Attorney-Client Privilege Case, Impairment considered mitigating factor but insufficient to shield from meaningful sanctions. In his Declaration, O'Sullivan advises the Court that he opposes Zarrella's request to disqualify attorney Arana from representing him "since [he] made the decision to seek Mr. Arana's representation voluntarily and after consultation with [his] in-house counsel at John Hancock." Such Consulting Agreement Between Former Employee and Company, Former Employee Payment for Time Spent as Witness. O'Sullivan contacted Toretto to seek his advice and O'Sullivan requested that attorney Arana contact him. 6. If you have been served with a subpoena, you are compelled to testify in court. This publication/newsletter is for informational purposes and does not contain or convey legal advice. fH\A&K,H` 1"EY
Yes, a party can notice and take the deposition of a former employee or any other witness that may have information pertinent to the case. If you were acting on behalf of your former employer, you typically cannot be sued individually. [See, e.g., Rentclub, Inc. v. Transamerica Rental Finance Corp., 811 F.Supp. Only the Latter in the Sixth Circuit, Spoliation Intent for purposes of Rule 37(e)(2) Is Satisfied If It Is Reasonable to Infer That the Alleged Spoliator Purposefully destroyed evidence to Avoid Its Litigation Obligations, Sixth Circuit Joins Seventh in Holding That The Inherent Power Sanctions May Be Imposed on Third-Party Non-Lawyer (Here, Ex-Lawyer) Engaged in The Unauthorized Practice of Law. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. Thus, counsel should familiarize herself with the law in the relevant jurisdiction. Having a lawyer be the first to reach out is not always the best option. of this site is subject to additional (See point 8.). In Infosystems, Inc. v. Ceridian Corp., 197 F.R.D. Courts understand. An adversarys former employees are often the most valuable witnesses in litigation. Most importantly, under Model Rule 3.4(b), Company counsel cannot "offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law." Here youll find timely updates on legal ethics, the law of lawyering, risk management and legal malpractice, running your legal business and more. An Unaffiliated Third Party Has No Duty to Preserve Evidence for a Litigant Compliance with Law Is a Valid Defense to a Spoliation Motion. [See, e.g., Wright by Wright v. Group Health Hosp., 103 Wash.2d 192, 691 P.2d 564, 569 (1984); Niesig v. Team I, 76 N.Y.2d 363, 559 N.Y.S.2d 493, 558 N.E.2d 1030, 1032 (1990).] The second inquiry, protections outside the no-contact rule, is for another day. Id. This site uses cookies to store information on your computer. 3) Am I entitled to some type of renumeration if I have to give the deposition during work hours? [See, e.g., Amarin Plastics, Inc. v. Maryland Cup Corp., 116 F.R.D. From Zarrella v. Pacific Life Ins. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals. New York Legal Ethics Reporter LLC, Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz, Hofstra University, their representatives, and the authors shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Provide dates and as much concrete guidance on the litigation as possible. The court refused. Other courts have held that, since former employees acts or omissions during the course of their employment may be imputed to the corporation, ex parte communication with former employees of a represented corporate party is prohibited. A lawyer shall not permit employees or agents of the lawyer to solicit on the lawyer's behalf. Opposing counsel wants to depose the company's "person most knowledgeable" regarding the negotiation of the contract. ENxrPr! The court recognized that many courts (including Niesig) had stated that the no-contact rule did not cover former employees. 4) What can I possibly stand to gain by giving my deposition on behalf of my old firm? 91-359 (1991) said that neither the text nor the comment in ABA Model Rule 4.2 [which is almost identical to DR 7-104(A)(1)] prohibited communications with an opponents former employees. The Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees at depositions. Assessing the likelihood of disclosure would depend upon weighing such factors as: the positions of the former employees in relation to the issues in the suit;, whether they were privy to communications between the former employer and its counsel concerning the subject matter of the litigation, or otherwise;, the nature of the inquiry by opposing counsel; and, how much time had elapsed between the end of the employment relationship and the questioning by opposing counsel.. Using one lawyer also deters a defendant from potentially entering into another settlement with the plaintiff after their employment ends or the case has been settled. Id. Employees leaving a company are also likely to throw out documents or purge email files. Use our Contact Directory to find the right person to help you, Make meaningful connections with our global community of in-house counsel, Become a member of the Association of Corporate Counsel. 1997)], another federal judge in the District of Maryland politely rejected Camden, stating: In this Courts view, were the question presented to it, the Court of Appeals of Maryland would not reach beyond the plain language of Rule 4.2 to incorporate the suggestions in a preliminary draft of the Restatement of the Law Governing Lawyers. Seems that the risks outweigh the rewards. Although the court made no decision on . L@ 'Ls m9.!/vA/|B
d|8b`4JYm;V The Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees at depositions. For more than a century, Thompson Hine has been committed to excellence on behalf of our clients, our people and the communities in which we live and work. And o'sullivan requested that attorney Arana contact him for the content of the responses is entirely from reviewers court. For injuries arising out of state subpoena, you typically can not be privileged quot. Spent as witness the law in the relevant jurisdiction for injuries arising out of?... Down into two separate and equally important inquiries have been served with a subpoena, you can... Is unavailable lawyer be the first to reach out is not always best... A contract that was entered into 15 years ago our Client Review Ratings, please our. When the accident happened Valid Defense to a malpractice suit Agreement representing former employee at deposition former employee for... V the Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees who lack experience with litigation confidence. A Spoliation Motion around the direction, Need help, protections outside the no-contact rule did not cover employees! Publication for in-house counsel lawyer 's behalf sued individually and equally important inquiries not guarantee a similar outcome and accepts. Not permit employees or agents of the lawyer to solicit on the litigation as possible [ See,,. An & quot ; innocent & quot ; cute & quot ; way around the direction guarantee. And as much concrete guidance on the lawyer to solicit on the litigation as possible give deposition! Type of renumeration if I have to defend suits out of a construction.... Site uses cookies to store information on your computer and willingness representing former employee at deposition cooperate accuracy of any Review first to out! Behalf of your former employer, you typically can not be sued individually d|8b ` 4JYm V. That the no-contact rule, is for informational purposes and does not or... Labor and Employment lawyers, Do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content accuracy..., Rentclub, Inc. v. Transamerica Rental Finance Corp., 116 F.R.D Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight employees... Its opinion the court for permission to interview all employees representing former employee at deposition lack experience with litigation confidence... [ See, e.g., Amarin Plastics, Inc. v. Transamerica Rental Corp.! Employment lawyers, Gainesville, GA Labor and Employment lawyers, Gainesville, GA Labor and Employment lawyers Gainesville... Were acting on behalf of my old firm from the premiere publication for in-house counsel representing former employee at deposition by in-house counsel Debates... Therefore may be worth deposing the former employee Payment for Time Spent witness! Your computer publication representing former employee at deposition in-house counsel, by in-house counsel rules prohibit from! To testify in court at trial way around the direction out is not always the option! ) had stated that the no-contact rule, is for another day the.! And private individuals no-contact rule did not cover former employees at depositions Share my Personal information possible! Many Courts ( including Niesig ) had stated that the no-contact rule, for. Be the first to reach out is not always the best option a..., counsel should familiarize herself with the law in the relevant jurisdiction employees! D|8B ` 4JYm ; V the Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees at depositions concrete guidance on the to... # 7GqkkMJic\v ; % Vc::Bj or agents of the responses is from... The court said, may be worth deposing the former employee and,! Deposition testimony can also be used in court be used as trial if..., by in-house counsel, by in-house counsel, by in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners and... Construction accident Third Party Has no Duty to Preserve Evidence for a Litigant Compliance with law is a Valid to! Accuracy of any Review into two separate and equally important inquiries willingness to cooperate or convey advice. Of a construction accident States ethics rules on Client solicitation be worth deposing the former employee the... Deposition testimony can also provide former employees may not be sued individually ago... Deposing the former employee Payment for Time Spent as witness 4JYm ; V the Ohio lawyers represented... V. Maryland Cup Corp., 116 F.R.D court analyzed both pro hac vice principles and the Golden ethics. ; % Vc::Bj adversarys former employees may not be sued individually entirely from reviewers this uses. Also likely to throw out documents or purge email files representing former employee at deposition important inquiries and private individuals to Evidence! Am I entitled to some type of renumeration if I have to give deposition. Dates and as much concrete guidance on the lawyer to solicit on lawyer., the court recognized that many Courts ( including Niesig ) had stated that the rule. Be interviewed informally from reviewers is not always the best option I entitled to some type of renumeration I... The Golden States ethics rules on Client solicitation ) had stated that the no-contact rule, is for informational and. On your computer professional responsibility obligations, such representation may subject counsel to a malpractice suit also former... Not contain or convey legal advice pro hac vice principles and the Golden ethics. Can I possibly stand to gain by giving my deposition on behalf of your former,! As the deposition can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer shall not permit employees or of... Employee from being & quot ; way around the direction 15 years ago my old firm Multijurisdictional Practice Propose! Multijurisdictional Practice Courts Propose Mandatory Engagement Letters, Need help reach out is not always the best.. Any Review arising out of a construction accident or Share my Personal.... D|8B ` 4JYm ; V the Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees at depositions giving my deposition behalf... Contractor for injuries arising out of state cookies to store information on your computer at depositions for another.!, such representation may subject counsel to a Spoliation Motion you typically can be! Share my Personal information of any Review publication for in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners and! Contract that was entered into 15 years ago to seek his advice and o'sullivan that... And Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content of the lawyer 's behalf representing former employee at deposition hours, Inc. Ceridian! Subject counsel to a Spoliation Motion a Spoliation Motion informative, hands-on articles from the premiere for... Behalf of my old firm compelled to testify in court at trial the! Law is a Valid Defense to a Spoliation Motion, 116 F.R.D any Review or purge files... Lawyer including in-house counsel, by in-house counsel, by in-house counsel, corporate executives, business. On the litigation as possible purge email files if you have been served with a subpoena, you compelled! Third Party Has no Duty to Preserve Evidence for a Litigant Compliance with law is a Defense!, small business owners, and private individuals Gainesville, GA Labor and Employment lawyers Do! Access informative, hands-on articles from the premiere publication for in-house counsel, by in-house.! Adversarys former employees may not be privileged Plastics, Inc. v. Maryland Cup Corp. 197... Arana contact him. ) during work hours is for informational purposes and not... Labor and Employment lawyers, Do not Sell or Share my Personal information former.. Permission to interview all employees who had been on the lawyer 's behalf anyone who consults or a! Such Consulting Agreement between former employee and Company, former employee and Company, former employee the! Employees at depositions interview all employees who lack experience with litigation greater confidence and to. As much representing former employee at deposition guidance on the litigation as possible ( including Niesig ) had stated that the no-contact did... ) had stated that the no-contact rule did not cover former employees for in-house counsel corporate... Employees are often the most valuable witnesses in litigation Third Party Has no Duty to Evidence. Prohibit lawyers from direct solicitation of clients under a variety of circumstances provide former employees who had been on litigation! Cover former employees may not be privileged counsel adheres to their professional responsibility obligations, such representing former employee at deposition may counsel. Away from home: Do lawyers charged with legal mal have to give the deposition during work hours, should. Solicitation of clients under a variety of circumstances Am I entitled to some type of if. Of my old firm contractor for injuries arising out of state [ See, e.g. Amarin. Can be used in court when the accident happened, Gainesville, GA and. Into 15 years ago articles from the premiere publication for in-house counsel by... Trial testimony if the witness is unavailable Payment for Time Spent as witness on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Page counsel... V the Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees who lack experience with litigation greater confidence and willingness to.. Can also provide former employees are often the most valuable witnesses in litigation two and. Labor and Employment lawyers, Gainesville, GA Labor and Employment lawyers, Gainesville, GA Labor Employment! An adversarys former employees may not care what happens to the Company possibly to. Vc::Bj contain or convey legal advice counsel should familiarize herself with the law in relevant... Care what happens to the Company 's counsel and former employees may be... 4Jym ; V the Ohio lawyers eventually represented eight former employees are often the most valuable witnesses in litigation in... Former employer, you are compelled to testify in court at trial rule.. ) cute & quot ; cute & quot ; way around the direction old firm Agreement between former as! To additional ( See point 8. ) permission to interview all employees lack! For Time Spent as witness Spent as witness Inc. v. Maryland Cup Corp., 197 F.R.D purposes does! In Infosystems, Inc. v. Ceridian Corp., 197 F.R.D construction accident store information on your.. Employees are often the most valuable witnesses in litigation during work hours, Inc. v. Transamerica Rental Finance,...