Walking the Line
As in-house counsel, you're no stranger to putting forth an effort to maintain a strong ethical backbone for your legal department and your company.
April 30, 2009 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
After the birth of my son, a local photographer offered my new family a free sitting at his studio. He said the package he offered, which also included several prints, was valued at around $850. Although the photographer presented the offer outside of my work setting, he knew I was the editor of a magazine and could potentially offer him photography gigs in the future. He didn't say this was his intention–and it may not have been. But I didn't know. And as tempting as the offer was, I had to decline.
As a magazine editor, I sometimes face these types of ethical dilemmas. And it's my job to know the difference between someone offering a free product or service for legitimate editorial purposes and someone expecting something in return. Professionals in key decision-making positions will often find themselves confronted with ethical dilemmas.
As in-house counsel, you're no stranger to putting forth an effort to maintain a strong ethical backbone for your legal department and your company. Following the corporate corruption that emerged earlier in this decade, ethics took center stage for the corporate legal community, and the economic downturn has ensured an encore.
InsideCounsel has taken several steps in response to the increasing interest in corporate legal ethics. Earlier this year, we launched Ethical Insights, a new column–currently written by Brian Martin, general counsel of KLA-Tencor–that focuses on how GCs can build and maintain high ethical standards for their legal departments.
We also have dedicated this issue's cover story to the topic. In “Tough Calls,” we asked ethics experts and in-house counsel to take us through several scenarios in which in-house counsel face difficult ethical decisions. We cover four scenarios: disclosure, financial reporting, internal investigations and withdrawal (leaving your job when you believe your company has conducted itself unethically). In each situation, the general counsel must make a subjective, often difficult, decision.
As the economy continues to struggle and corporate corruption remains a reality, maintaining strong ethics will be a priority for in-house counsel. And regardless of economic or corporate trends, ethics will always be the hallmark of an upstanding legal department.
After the birth of my son, a local photographer offered my new family a free sitting at his studio. He said the package he offered, which also included several prints, was valued at around $850. Although the photographer presented the offer outside of my work setting, he knew I was the editor of a magazine and could potentially offer him photography gigs in the future. He didn't say this was his intention–and it may not have been. But I didn't know. And as tempting as the offer was, I had to decline.
As a magazine editor, I sometimes face these types of ethical dilemmas. And it's my job to know the difference between someone offering a free product or service for legitimate editorial purposes and someone expecting something in return. Professionals in key decision-making positions will often find themselves confronted with ethical dilemmas.
As in-house counsel, you're no stranger to putting forth an effort to maintain a strong ethical backbone for your legal department and your company. Following the corporate corruption that emerged earlier in this decade, ethics took center stage for the corporate legal community, and the economic downturn has ensured an encore.
InsideCounsel has taken several steps in response to the increasing interest in corporate legal ethics. Earlier this year, we launched Ethical Insights, a new column–currently written by Brian Martin, general counsel of KLA-Tencor–that focuses on how GCs can build and maintain high ethical standards for their legal departments.
We also have dedicated this issue's cover story to the topic. In “Tough Calls,” we asked ethics experts and in-house counsel to take us through several scenarios in which in-house counsel face difficult ethical decisions. We cover four scenarios: disclosure, financial reporting, internal investigations and withdrawal (leaving your job when you believe your company has conducted itself unethically). In each situation, the general counsel must make a subjective, often difficult, decision.
As the economy continues to struggle and corporate corruption remains a reality, maintaining strong ethics will be a priority for in-house counsel. And regardless of economic or corporate trends, ethics will always be the hallmark of an upstanding legal department.
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 AllGC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
Trending Stories
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