A screenshot from the Morris James Solicitors website, which is unaffiliated with Delaware-based U.S. firm Morris James.Cyber Scammers Target Morris James, Faking UK Affiliation
Delaware-based Morris James warned that a website borrowing real details about the firm was thoroughly phony.
August 05, 2019 at 01:00 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
Midsize law firm Morris James has found that its name is being used by a website claiming to belong to a group of solicitors in the United Kingdom affiliated with the firm.
The problem is, there is no such group.
Morris James posted a notification on its own website and social media Thursday warning that the website www.morrisjamessolicitors.com “is NOT associated with Morris James LLP.”
In its announcement, the law firm said it has reported the website to the FBI, the Action Fraud team of the U.K. police and the Solicitors Regulation Authority in the U.K. Morris James is also “taking steps with the website host to persuade them to take down the website,” the firm said.
Morris James declined to comment further on the incident.
The solicitors site uses logos and coloring similar to Morris James’ branding, and it makes a reference to the real firm’s main office in Delaware.
However, Morris James noted, the phone numbers listed on the site will not connect a caller with any of the firm’s U.S. offices, and no one answering those lines will be a representative to the firm.
The impostor website says Morris James Solicitors has an office at 1 Waterhouse Square, 138 Holborn in London, which appears to be the site of a WeWork shared office space. A call to the Delaware phone number listed on the impostor site leads to the message “the phone number you have dialed is unreachable.”
According to GoDaddy.com’s WHOIS database, the impostor site’s domain is registered to Shinjiru Technology Sdn Bhd, which appears to be a Malaysian web hosting entity.
Morris James’ situation is reminiscent of other instances of law firm or lawyer identity theft in recent years.
In 2017, the photos of lawyers from Brydon Swearengen & England in Missouri were used to create a website for a fake firm called Wesley & McCain. The phony firm’s website also listed the address of actual Pittsburgh law firm Robb Leonard Mulvihill as its own street address.
A Houston lawyer for Jackson Walker found in 2017 that his headshot appeared on the website of a fictitious firm, Walsh & Padilla.
Preventing such theft is virtually impossible, privacy experts have said, given that the entire purpose of a website is to disseminate useful information about the firm. The problem arises when that information is used improperly.
But unlike other businesses that engage in e-commerce, law firms usually do not collect payment information on their websites. So establishing the motives of such a hack can be difficult.
In the Wesley & McCain instance, the fake firm was found out because it sent a letter to Amazon.com alleging that it was selling a patent-infringing product.
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 All
UnitedLex Appoints GC Renee Meisel as New CEO, Replacing James Schellhase After Short Tenure
Marriott to Pay $52M, Upgrade Cybersecurity to Settle Probes Into 3 Big Breaches
Just 11% of Legal Departments Predict Gen AI Will Be 'Transformative,' as Its Honeymoon Phase Fades
7 minute read
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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
