Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

The ethical duty of competence in 2015

By Andrea Donovan Napp on November 23, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Although the legal field is not a profession known for embracing change, several developments over the past year have made it clear that even lawyers have an ethical obligation to understand the basics of modern technology.  This summer, Massachusetts became the fourteenth state to include an express duty of technological competence in its state ethics rules for legal professionals.  Additionally, 2015 saw the publication of guidance from three state bar associations—New York, Florida and California—which underscore the breadth and importance of the duty of technological competence.

The New York State Bar Association and Florida’s Professional Ethics Committee both issued guidance related to social media usage by lawyers.  The Commercial and Federal Litigation Section of the New York State Bar Association promulgated Social Media Ethics Guidelines that advise counsel who utilize social media that they have a minimum obligation to understand how various platforms work and what information will be available to whom. Similarly, the Florida bar opined on the related issue of the ethics of advising clients to change or alter social media accounts, concluding that a lawyer can advise a client to change privacy settings, or even remove information, as long as the information is preserved.

The opinion issued by the State Bar of California Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility is the most far reaching, examining an attorney’s obligations concerning e-discovery generally and concluding that the “ethical duty of competence requires an attorney to assess at the outset of each case what electronic discovery issues might arise during the litigation, including the likelihood that e-discovery will or should be sought by the other side.”  Notably,  this assessment must occur on a case-by-case basis because “the duty of competence may require a higher level of technical knowledge and ability, depending on the e-discovery issues involved in a matter, and the nature of the ESI.”  Following this analysis, “[a]n attorney lacking the required competence for e-discovery issues has three options: (1) acquire sufficient learning and skill before performance is required; (2) associate with or consult technical consultants or competent counsel; or (3) decline the client representation.”

Photo of Andrea Donovan Napp Andrea Donovan Napp

Andrea Donovan Napp is chair of the firm’s Electronic Discovery and Information Management Team. In addition to e-discovery, Andrea focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation, business torts, and market conduct cases, representing businesses, municipalities, and individuals in various jurisdictions. As chair of…

Andrea Donovan Napp is chair of the firm’s Electronic Discovery and Information Management Team. In addition to e-discovery, Andrea focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation, business torts, and market conduct cases, representing businesses, municipalities, and individuals in various jurisdictions. As chair of the Electronic Discovery and Information Management Team, Andrea coordinates Robinson+Cole’s use of the latest technology, such as Concordance, CaseMap, LAW, LiveNote, and various Web-based platforms, to achieve maximum efficiency and compliance for our clients. Andrea has significant experience in all aspects of e-discovery, including document retention and data management planning, development of defensible collection policies, and management of large scale reviews and production. She has managed several large, sophisticated e-discovery projects in government investigations and private litigation. Notably, she led United Technologies Corporation’s privilege review in the Department of Justice’s antitrust review of the largest-ever aerospace merger. She routinely counsels clients on the development of data retention policies, legal hold practices, and e-discovery response plans. Read her rc.com bio here.

Email
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Ethics & Professional Responsibility
  • Blog:
    Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider
  • Organization:
    Robinson & Cole LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo