Don Foster

November 22, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer

The key feature of the attorney-client relationship is the reliance the client places upon the skill and expertise of the attorney. This feature does not exist when an attorney represents himself, or when he asks a subordinate attorney to do something without relying on the ­subordinate's superior knowledge or expertise in a particular area of the law. The independence of the attorney from the client is the hallmark of the relationship and is the lynchpin of the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Kay v. Ehrler that in order for there to be an attorney-client relationship there must be a principal (client) and an agent (attorney).

By Don Foster

14 minute read

November 15, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer

We have all heard the adage that a person who represents himself has a fool for a client. The idiom is intended to apply generically to all pro se litigants, but applies as much to the attorney representing him or herself as it does the nonlawyer—the reasoning being at least in part that the role of counselor and advocate merges with the subjective desires and objectives of the client and eliminates the independence and objectivity that is often needed in an attorney-client relationship.

By Don Foster

17 minute read

September 22, 2015 | The Legal Intelligencer

When an attorney is contemplating moving from one law firm to another, both parties need to identify potential client conflicts, and will want to share baseline financial information about the other in order to assess the economic benefit behind the move, which invariably is the driving force behind the discussions in the first place. Both considerations are governed by the limitations contained within Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6.

By Don Foster

7 minute read

September 21, 2015 | The Legal Intelligencer

When an attorney is contemplating moving from one law firm to another, both parties need to identify potential client conflicts, and will want to share baseline financial information about the other in order to assess the economic benefit behind the move, which invariably is the driving force behind the discussions in the first place. Both considerations are governed by the limitations contained within Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6.

By Don Foster

7 minute read

February 12, 2013 | The Legal Intelligencer

Although there is abundant case law in Pennsylvania discussing remedies available to an innocent party when the other party destroys evidence, there is no Pennsylvania decisional law that addresses the discoverability of "litigation hold" notices from an attorney to his or her client, or of any other communication between attorney and client that addresses the obligation to preserve evidence. This article addresses the growing case law emanating from district courts within the Third Circuit that permit limited discovery of such communications.

By Don Foster

8 minute read