State Bar Rejects LegalMatch Bid to Operate Attorney Referral Service
LegalMatch said the issues the California bar identified were "technicalities" that could be addressed within a week.
June 24, 2020 at 06:53 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
California's state bar has rejected LegalMatch's request for certification as a lawyer referral service and called again on the South San Francisco company to "cease and desist all operations" in the state.
In a June 23 letter to LegalMatch chief operating officer Anna Ostrovsky, bar program supervisor Lauren McCurdy presents more than seven pages of alleged "deficiencies" in the company's March application.
In an email to The Recorder, Ostrovsky said the issues the bar identified were "technicalities" that could be addressed within a week.
"I find it very troubling that while the State Bar has focused its energies on shutting down our operations or suing us for damages while we are doing our best to comply, there are currently certified referral services that don't meet some of the technical issues laid out by the State Bar's letter and numerous other referral services that have not applied for certification at all," Ostrovsky wrote. "We hope going forward the State Bar chooses to work with us in a collaborative manner so that we can jointly 'help Californians find qualified lawyers that best match their needs.'"
The bar's letter said certain panel attorneys do not carry required insurance and that LegalMatch has not established clear qualifications for lawyers asserting a specialized practice focus. The bar also alleged LegalMatch's automatic referral service doesn't provide clients a way to get technical help if they have a problem. And the site's promotional materials don't comply with state bar rules, the bar's letter said.
LegalMatch is continuing to operate illegally as an uncertified lawyer referral service, McCurdy said in the letter.
"Accordingly, unless and until LegalMatch obtains certification by the State Bar, it must cease and desist all operations in California and its attorneys may not accept referrals until such time as LegalMatch is duly certified," McCurdy wrote.
McCurdy also warned that lawyers who accept referrals from LegalMatch could face bar discipline.
The letter is the latest skirmish in the battle between the bar and LegalMatch over the site, which promises users they can "find the right lawyer now."
The bar sued LegalMatch in San Francisco County Superior Court in May, alleging that it was operating illegally under California attorney referral rules. Judge Ethan Schulman of the San Francisco Superior Court, however, rejected the bar's request for a temporary restraining order to stop LegalMatch's services, noting that bar officials were still reviewing LegalMatch's application. The remaining lawsuit continues, with a case management conference set for October.
The suit followed a decision in an unrelated case by the First District Court of Appeal, upheld by the California Supreme court earlier this year, that concluded LegalMatch is operating as an unauthorized lawyer referral service.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudges Push for Action to Combat Increasing Threats Against Judiciary
3 minute read'A Horrible Reputation for Bad Verdicts': Plaintiffs Attorney Breaks Down $129M Wrongful-Death Verdict From Conservative Venue
Insurers Dodge Sherwin-Williams' Claim for $102M Lead Paint Abatement Payment, State High Court Rules
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250