I'm working on my farewell tour/victory lap which will take me to a bunch of bar associations this year. In addition to saying goodbye and introducing Dave Channing, who has succeeded me at the ethics desk at Geraghty and Bonnano, I plan to flog the 4^th edition of Connecticut Legal Ethics and Malpractice which Jamie Sullivan and I first published about 10 years ago. It should be out this summer and is still the only comprehensive book on the subject on the market. With any luck, we'll crack double digits on sales this round.

Looking for a CLE topic other than the usual "don't steal from your clients," I thought that maybe since it's been a generation since folks began seriously talking about the Connecticut disciplinary system and writing/enacting/implementing the rule changes that created the office of chief disciplinary counsel, it might be interesting to look at where we've been and where we're going in lawyer discipline. My inquiry was whether we'd had any impact on what many at the time thought was a problem—a system of self-regulation that didn't seem to many to work all that well, was slow, and seemed to let bad actors misbehave long after they should have been escorted off the field.