![Lynn Nichols and Ellen BrotmaCourtesy Photo](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2020/12/Lynn-Nichols-and-Ellen-Brotma-Article-202012181222.jpg)
Are You Committing the Unauthorized Practice of Law in Your Kitchen?
While we may still be representing Pennsylvania clients in Pennsylvania matters, does it matter if we are not doing it in Pennsylvania?
March 05, 2021 at 12:31 PM
7 minute read
Decades ago when the Rules of Professional Conduct were codified in Pennsylvania, we all went to offices in the jurisdiction where we served our clients. We were listed in the Yellow Pages; we read actual law books and we had paper files. The phones stopped ringing after 5 p.m. and we could get our work done. We interpreted Pennsylvania law in Pennsylvania matters and we did not worry about virtual offices or multi-jurisdictional practice or globalization.
Things have changed. Technology permeates our lives and is both a boon and a bane. It frees us to work anywhere, anytime—leading us to work everywhere, all the time. We go to the beach and bring our laptops; we go on vacation and carry our practices in our phones. While we may still be representing Pennsylvania clients in Pennsylvania matters, does it matter if we are not doing it in Pennsylvania? The use of remote work by attorneys has taken a quantum leap in the past year (for reasons we would rather not discuss!) and it has led to some salutary transformation of our understanding of the rule governing unauthorized practice of law, Pennsylvania Rule of Professional Conduct 5.5.
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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![Visa Revocation and Removal: Can the New Administration Remove Foreign Nationals for Past Advocacy? Visa Revocation and Removal: Can the New Administration Remove Foreign Nationals for Past Advocacy?](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/8f/0d/9830864b4091be74cb5ce64e2fce/nick-lowrey-767x633.jpg)
Visa Revocation and Removal: Can the New Administration Remove Foreign Nationals for Past Advocacy?
6 minute read![Saul Ewing Loses Two Partners to Fox Rothschild, Marking Four Fla. Partner Exits in Last 13 Months Saul Ewing Loses Two Partners to Fox Rothschild, Marking Four Fla. Partner Exits in Last 13 Months](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/70/63/50b038604196ba08df26dc76c61e/zemel-poppe-767x633.jpg)
Saul Ewing Loses Two Partners to Fox Rothschild, Marking Four Fla. Partner Exits in Last 13 Months
3 minute read![Exceptional Growth Becoming the Rule? Demand Drove Strong Year for Big Law Exceptional Growth Becoming the Rule? Demand Drove Strong Year for Big Law](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/ec/95/704b5aa843afb16a569eee6f6512/lifting-economic-767x633.jpg)
Exceptional Growth Becoming the Rule? Demand Drove Strong Year for Big Law
Trending Stories
- 1Big Law's Middle East Bet: Will It Pay Off?
- 2'Translate Across Disciplines': Paul Hastings’ New Tech Transactions Leader
- 3Milbank’s Revenue and Profits Surge Following Demand Increases Across the Board
- 4Fourth Quarter Growth in Demand and Worked Rates Coincided with Countercyclical Dip, New Report Indicates
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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