john c. anjier - lba › files › john anjier - ethics - bcc 2011 materials.… · the conundrum...

New Orleans | Lafayette | Houston | 1 A Professional Law Corporation New Orleans | Lafayette | Houston | 1 A Professional Law Corporation

John C Anjier

Louisiana Bankers Association 2011 LBA Bank Counsel Conference The Ethics of Negotiations

December 16 2011

New Orleans | Lafayette | Houston | 2

Program

The Conundrum of Negotiation and Ethics Applicable Rules Legal Communities Attitudes Towards

Negotiation Ethics Types of Deception Ethical and Unethical Deception Good Negotiation Techniques in Face of the

Ethical Landscape


Negotiation is the Most Important Process that Lawyers Engage In Business transactions Loans Family law Personal injury litigation Commercial litigation Criminal law


Negotiation is Interactive

How we interact shapes how the other person interacts which in turn shapes us and so on

Like poker not chess Perception is very important Attorney with the best alternative to the negotiation

will have the most chips with which to negotiate Negotiation is the use of appropriate techniques to

ascertain those chips and to project that ones own side has more chips


Negotiation is Inherently Deceptive

Parties have incomplete information No duty to provide material information No requirement of honest dealing Bluffing puffing other misdirection are inherent ABA in crafting the model rules specifically rejected

the requirement of truth in negotiations To conceal ones true position to mislead an

opponent about ones true settling point is the essence of negotiation


Like the poker player a negotiator hopes that his opponent will overestimate the value of is hand Like the poker player in a variety of ways he must facilitate his opponents inaccurate assessment The critical difference between those who are successful negotiators and those who are not lies in this capacity both to mislead and not be misled

Negotiation as Poker


Trustworthiness and Deception are Relative Concepts Does this dress look nice Are you free Friday night Can you make a presentation at my

conference The highest my client can pay is $100000


The Conundrum Ethics ndash A set of moral principals a

consciousness of moral importance Duty to zealously represent client How to be ethical in a process that relies on

deception How to be ethical where total honesty would be

a disservice to your client What is a good deception and what is bad

deception


Sources of Rules

La Rules of Professional Conduct ABA and Bar Opinions Civil Law

bull FraudNegligent Misrepresentation bull Fiduciary Duty bull Agency Law

Criminal Law Community StandardsReputation


Negotiation Styles Competitive

bull Zero sum bull Maximize gain bull Takes firm extreme positions

Compromising bull Win somelose some bull Wants to be reasonable and accommodate

CollaborativeJoint Problem Solving bull Winwin bull Maximize own gain and gain of other parties bull Integrative


Basic Negotiating Strategy Play your cards close to your chest - give little or no information to the

other side The less they know about your interests as to why we want to make the purchase your preferences or the point at which you would decline to deal the better your position Expressing eagerness or need reveals a weakness which could be exploited to your disadvantage

The opposite is equally true - try to pry as much information from the other side Any additional information that you uncover can be used as leverage to negotiate a better deal

The only thing you should ever tell - the only information you should ever reveal are those alternative options such as other sellers which shows you are prepared to walk from the negotiation whenever it suits you

Let them make the first offer - whatever is used as the first offer will generally act as an anchor upon which the rest of the negotiation will revolve Try to get the other side to set the stage from which to start


DenverPhoenix Study

Survey of 308 lawyers in Denver and Phoenix Asked to describe counsel for most recent case

or transaction and rate effectiveness 65 cooperativeproblem solvers 24 combativeadversarial 11 other 59 of cooperative lawyers rated effective 25 of combative lawyers rated effective


Hinshaw Study Hypo Former girlfriend contacts plaintiff and informs him that she

was positive for an incurable deadly AIDS-type virus and was so during their relationship

Plaintiff takes two home tests that confirms that he contracted the virus and he sues former girlfriend

Liability is not contested only the amount of the damages As negotiations are about to begin plaintiff learns from the

hospital that he does not have the virus and the two tests were false positives He tells his lawyer that he still wants to pursue the claim and does not want to inform the girlfriend of the test results because he wants to punish her


Hinshaw Results - Would the lawyer negotiate the case

No Yes Unsure

Unconditional 62 19 19

Conditional 64 13 23


Applicable La Rules of Professional Conduct 12 Duty not to assist in crime or fraud 14 Duty to keep client informed 16 Duty to keep information confidential 41 Truthfulness in statements to others 42 Duty not to contact represented party 44 Respect for rights of third persons


La Rule Professional Conduct 41

Rule 41 Truthfulness in Statements to Others In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly (a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person or (b) fail to disclose a material fact when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by a client unless disclosure is prohibited by Rule 16


Rule 41 Comment [1]

Misrepresentation A lawyer is required to be truthful when dealing with others on

a clients behalf but generally has no affirmative duty to inform an opposing party of relevant facts A misrepresentation can occur if the lawyer incorporates or affirms a statement of another person that the lawyer knows is false Misrepresentations can also occur by partially true but misleading statements or omissions that are the equivalent of affirmative false statements For dishonest conduct that does not amount to a false statement or for misrepresentations by a lawyer other than in the course of representing a client see Rule 84


Comparison to Rule 33 Candor Towards the Tribunal (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a

false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer

(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel or

(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false If a lawyer the lawyers client or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures including if necessary disclosure to the tribunal A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter that the lawyer reasonably believes is false


Duties to Tribunal

Affirmative duty to disclose adverse controlling authority Fraudulent conduct must be disclosed and is

not limited by Rule 16 Extends to settlement negotiations in a

litigation context with a judge or magistrate See ABA Formal Opinion 93-370


ABA Formal Opinion 93-370

While as explained in the Comment supra a certain amount of posturing or puffery in settlement negotiations may be an acceptable convention between opposing counsel a partys actual bottom line or the settlement authority given to a lawyer is a material fact A deliberate misrepresentation or lie to a judge in pretrial negotiations would be improper under Rule 41



bullInterprets Rule 41 bullMost definitive statement from ABA on the ethics of negotiations bullExcludes opinions and predictions from coverage of rule bullAllows a wide range of bluffing and puffing as long as the misrepresentation is not presented as a fact


Example from ABA Opinion

[W]hether in direct negotiations or a caucused mediation care must be taken by the lawyer to ensure that communications regarding the clients position which otherwise would not be considered statements of fact are not conveyed in language that converts them even inadvertently into false factual representations For example even though a clients Board of Directors has authorized a higher settlement figure a lawyer may state in the negotiation that the client does not wish to settle for more than $50 However it would not be permissible for the lawyer to state that the Board had formally disapproved any settlement for more than $50 when authority in fact had been granted to settle for a higher sum


The Keys to Rule 41

Key to understanding Rule 41(a) is the meaning of the phrase false statement of material fact Its meaning turns on three factors ndash What constitutes a false statement What is a statement of fact and When will such statements be considered

material


False Statement The phrase false statement is not limited to

affirmative falsehoods Rather it extends as well to incorporating or affirming a statement the lawyer knows to be false and making partially true but misleading statements or omissions

ldquoA misrepresentation can occur if the lawyer incorporates or affirms a statement of another person that the lawyer knows is false Misrepresentations can also occur by partially true but misleading statements or omissions that are the equivalent of affirmative false statementsrdquo Rule 41 Comment [1]


No Duty of Disclosure under Rule 41

Generally no duty to voluntarily inform an opposing party of relevant facts when negotiating

No affirmative duty to inform an opposing party of relevant factsrdquo 41(a) Comment [1]

Absent special relationship or express contractual or statutory duties lawyer not normally obliged to divulge relevant legal or factual information In the Matter of Steven T Potts 336 Mont 517 158 P3d 418 (Mont)


Some Argue Duties to Disclose Some courts academics and bar association ethics committees suggest that

a lawyer may in some circumstances have a duty to correct a misapprehension on the part of an adversary that did not emanate from any statement by the attorney or anyone acting on the attorneys behalf

See State ex rel Nebraska State Bar Assn v Addison 412 NW2d 855 (Neb 1987) (attorney suspended for failing to disclose existence of insurance policy about which he was asked no questions) Kentucky Bar Assn v Geisler 938 SW2d 578 (Ky 1997) (sanctioning attorney for failing to disclose death of client)

But see Pa Bar Assn Comm on Legal Ethics and Profl Responsibility Informal Op 93-51 (1993) and Va Bar Assn Standing Comm on Legal Ethics Op 952 (1987) (finding no duty to disclose death of plaintiff)


Spaulding v Zimmerman 116 NW 2d 704 (Minn 1962) Plaintiff a minor boy was injured (ribs and shoulder)

in automobile accident Defense doctor confirms injuries that plaintiff sued upon but discovers new injury from the accident a potentially fatal aneurysm on plaintiffs aorta Lawyers for plaintiff and defendant negotiate a settlement The defense lawyers never tell plaintiffs counsel of the life-threatening aneurism Plaintiff later discovers aneurism and sues to set aside the settlement


Spaulding Holding

Court vacates settlement but Finds no ethical duty to disclose In fact lawyers

have an affirmative duty to maintain the confidentiality of this information under Rule 16

Instead court finds that lawyer as officer of the court had duty to inform court because the court had to approve the settlement as the plaintiff was a minor However if plaintiff had not been minor then settlement would have been upheld and enforced


Duty to Disclose where Mistake Induced by LawyerClient [T]he duty to avoid misrepresentations and

misleading conduct implies a professional responsibility to correct mistakes induced by the lawyer or the lawyers client and not to exploit such mistakes Am Bar Assn Section Of Litigation Ethical

Guidelines for Settlement Negotiations (2002) at 1


Mississippi Bar v Mathis 620 So 2d 1213 (Miss 1993) Husband dies alone of gun shot wound Friendly coroner rules

death an accident and deceased is quickly buried Life insurance company refuses to pay and widow sues to

collect on policy Her lawyer and son secretly have autopsy performed Not knowing widow testifies that she opposed an autopsy

because she could not bear to have her husbands body torn apart

Lawyer does not disclose that autopsy was actually performed and asserts to insurance company that no autopsy should be performed

Lawyer suspended from practice


Adoptive Disclosures

Rule 41 Comment [1] A misrepresentation can occur if the lawyer

incorporates or affirms a statement of another person that the lawyer knows is false


Duty to Correct Half Truths

Misrepresentations can also occur by partially true but misleading statements or omissions that are the equivalent of affirmative false statements Rule 41 Comment [1]

Cresswell v Sullivan amp Cromwell 668 F Supp 166 (SDNY 1987) (law firm liable after settlement where it denied regulatory investigation and later withheld recent letter indicating that there was in fact an investigation before settlement)


Carpenitorsquos Case 651 A2d 1 (NH 1994) Duty to correct misstatement Attorney told opposing counsel that proceeds

from joint account had been deposited into CD Subsequently Attorney learns that funds were

not yet deposited and instructs staff to deposit proceeds Attorney does not correct earlier statement Violation of Rule 41


Voluntary Disclosure of Information

Creates duty to disclose the whole truth necessary to avoid misleading the other party See MSA Tubular Products Inc v First Bank amp Trust Co 869 F2d 1422 (10th Cir 1989)

Although a party may keep absolute silence and violate no rule of equity yet if he volunteers to speak and to convey information which may influence the conduct of the other party he is bound to disclose the whole truth Ragland v Shattuck National Bank 36 F2d 983 (10th cir 1994)


Fact Statements of Fact [2] This Rule refers to statements of fact Whether a particular

statement should be regarded as one of fact can depend on the circumstances Under generally accepted conventions in negotiation certain types of statements ordinarily are not taken as statements of material fact Estimates of price or value placed on the subject of a transaction and a partys intentions as to an acceptable settlement of a claim are ordinarily in this category and so is the existence of an undisclosed principal except where nondisclosure of the principal would constitute fraud Lawyers should be mindful of their obligations under applicable law to avoid criminal and tortious misrepresentation Rule 41 Comment [2]

Term of Art


Statements of Future Actions Rule 41 is not applicable See eg Continental Bank NA v Meyer 10 F3d

1293 1298 (7th Cir 1993) (A statement which relates to future or contingent events expectations or probabilities rather than to pre-existent or present facts ordinarily does not constitute an actionable misrepresentation under Illinois law)

In re Trans Union Corp Privacy Litigation 2009 US Dist LEXIS 116934 (ND Il October 1 2009)


Circumstances to Whether Statement is a Fact The past relationship of the negotiating persons Their apparent sophistication The plausibility of the statement on its face The phrasing of the statement Related communication between the persons involved The known negotiating practices of the community Similar circumstances Restatement (Third) of The Law Governing Lawyers

sect 98 cmt c (2000)


Material

No case defines the term material for purposes of the Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct However the Louisiana Supreme Court has held in another context that a material fact is one whose existence or nonexistence is essential to the resolution of a matter Dane Ciolino Louisiana Legal Ethics (ebook) httplalegalethicsorg (citing Smith v Our Lady of the Lake Hosp Inc 639 So 2d 730 751 (La 1994))


What is Material

Actual bottom line settlement authority Whether client is alive Amount of insurance available Identity of a party Authority to accept a particular settlement Existence of pre-existing judgment or lien


Summary of What One Can Do and Cant Do Under the Rule No duty to inform of material information Cannot make material misrepresentations of

fact or law Can make non-material misstatements of fact

and law Can make material misstatements of opinion Allowed to puff and bluff Can make statement of future consequences Key is what is material and fact


Common Manipulations

Making arbitrary and inflated demand Making threat that one does not intend to carry

out Advocating for issue that is not central to

create bargaining chip


Acceptable Puffing

Drawn from Comments to 41 amp ABA 06-43934 Making estimates of price or value Declaring intentions as to acceptable settlement Undisclosed principal Parties willingness to compromise Exaggerating strength of position Understatements of weakness of opponents position Whether prescription has run


Estimates of Price or Value I believe that this house is worth at most $100000


Intentions as to Acceptable Settlement

My client wants at least $100000


Undisclosed Principal


Willingness to Compromise

My client will never settle without joint custody of the children


Exaggerating Strength of Position


Overstating Weakness of Opponents Position


Statewide Grievance Committee v Joseph L Gillis CV030479677S 2004 Conn Super LEXIS 340 (Conn Sup Ct Jan 27 2004) Court held no violation of Rule 41 where

counsel in settlement negotiation with adjustor represented plaintiff as lsquoan active manrsquo (despite the two prior five percent permanent disability ratings from the March 4 1999 accident) who after December could not participate in any activity which requires the slightest bit of physical exertion


Consequences of Bad Deception

Liable civilly and criminally Contract void or voidable Sanctions


Examples Withholding that ones client is dead or misrepresenting that client is alive

La State Bar Assn v Boutall 597 So 2d 444 (La 1992) (misrepresenting that a deceased client is still alive)

Misrepresenting insurance policy limits and insurance available Nebraska State Bar Assoc v Addison 226 Neb 585 412 NW2d 855 (Neb 1987) (failing to disclose $1 million umbrella policy that was available)

Misrepresenting legal remedies and liens See La State Bar Assn v Harrington 585 So 2d 514 (La 1990) (collection on carpet)

Failing to inform party of mortgage In re Rodger Sellers 95-2764 (La 031596) 669 So 2d 1204

Failing to inform party that client intended to pursue additional claims after settlement Pendleton v Cent NM Corr Facility 184 FRD 637 (D NM 1999)


Improper Behavior

Bullying bull Embarrassing or harassing

other party bull Abusive language bull Rudeness bull Hurrying or rushing bull Blaming


Rule 44 Respect for Rights of Third Persons (a) In representing a client a lawyer shall

not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass delay or burden a third person or use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person


Other Ethical Rules Rule 14 Communication (a) A lawyer shall (1) promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance with respect

to which the clientrsquos informed consent as defined in Rule 10(e) is required by these Rules

(2) reasonably consult with the client about the means by which the clientrsquos objectives are to be accomplished

(3) keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter (4) promptly comply with reasonable requests for information and (5) consult with the client about any relevant limitation on the lawyerrsquos

conduct when the lawyer knows that the client expects assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law

(b) The lawyer shall give the client sufficient information to participate intelligently in decisions concerning the objectives of the representation and the means by which they are to be pursued


Rule 16 Confidentiality of Information

(a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b)


Rule 42 Communication with Person Represented by Counsel Unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer

or is authorized to do so by law or a court order a lawyer in representing a client shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with

(a) a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter

May encourage client to call opposing side ABA Formal Opinion 92-362

May call in house lawyer even though there is outside counsel ABA Formal Opinion 06-443


LRPC 12(d)

(d) A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage or assist a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity scope meaning or application of the law


Threats of Criminal Prosecution

The Model Rules do not prohibit a lawyer from using the possibility of presenting criminal charges against the opposing party in a private civil matter to gain relief for a client provided that the criminal matter is related to the clients civil claim the lawyer has a well-founded belief that both the civil claim and the criminal charges are warranted by the law and the facts and the lawyer does not attempt to exert or suggest improper influence over the criminal process ABA Formal Opinion 92-363


Threats of Disciplinary Action

A lawyers use of the threat of filing a disciplinary complaint or report against opposing counsel to obtain an advantage in a civil case is constrained by the Model Rules despite the absence of an express prohibition on the subject Such a threat may not be used as a bargaining point when the subject misconduct raises a substantial question as to opposing counsels honesty trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer because in these circumstances the lawyer is ethically required to report such misconduct ABA Formal Opinion 94-383


Common Aggressive Tactics

Precondition demand You offer first Extreme demand Extreme demandsmall demand False demandfalse concession Escalation Late hit Salami Deadlock and concede


Pointers for Effective Negotiation

Be prepared bull Know the documents case parties counsel and issues

Be truthful Be reserved in the information that you convey Be courteous and respectful

bull What comes around goes around Know when to shut up Communicate that you have other alternatives Plan negotiation with regard to importance of issues focal

points structure and timing Minimize zero sum equations


Tactics to Respond to Aggressive Negotiation Tactics Listen Ask questions

bull Cannot make affirmative misrepresentations bull Evasive answers can provide information

Just say no Ask for justifications Tit for tat Make small concessions

bull Wait for reciprocal concessions


Questions

John C Anjier Liskow amp Lewis (504) 556-4177 direct jcanjierliskowcom

Slide Number 1

Program

Negotiation is the Most Important Process that Lawyers Engage In




Trustworthiness and Deception are Relative Concepts

The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles

Basic Negotiating Strategy

DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study

Hinshaw Results -Would the lawyer negotiate the case

Applicable La Rules of Professional Conduct


Rule 41 Comment [1]

Comparison to Rule 33Candor Towards the Tribunal

Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement


Some Argue Duties to Disclose

Spaulding v Zimmerman 116 NW 2d 704 (Minn 1962)

Spaulding Holding

Duty to Disclose where Mistake Induced by LawyerClient

Mississippi Bar v Mathis 620 So 2d 1213 (Miss 1993)



Carpenitorsquos Case 651 A2d 1 (NH 1994)


Fact

Statements of Future Actions

Circumstances to Whether Statement is a Fact

Material

What is Material

Summary of What One Can Do and Cant Do Under the Rule


Acceptable Puffing

Estimates of Price or Value






Statewide Grievance Committee v Joseph L Gillis CV030479677S 2004 Conn Super LEXIS 340 (Conn Sup Ct Jan 27 2004)


Examples

Improper Behavior

Rule 44 Respect for Rights of Third Persons

Other Ethical Rules Rule 14 Communication


Rule 42 Communication with Person Represented by Counsel

LRPC 12(d)





Tactics to Respond to Aggressive Negotiation Tactics

Questions


Program

The Conundrum of Negotiation and Ethics Applicable Rules Legal Communities Attitudes Towards

Negotiation Ethics Types of Deception Ethical and Unethical Deception Good Negotiation Techniques in Face of the

Ethical Landscape

























deception


Sources of Rules
















DenverPhoenix Study











No Yes Unsure









Rule 41 Comment [1]









Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions

























deception


Sources of Rules
















DenverPhoenix Study











No Yes Unsure









Rule 41 Comment [1]









Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions


Sources of Rules
















DenverPhoenix Study











No Yes Unsure









Rule 41 Comment [1]









Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions













DenverPhoenix Study











No Yes Unsure









Rule 41 Comment [1]









Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions









No Yes Unsure









Rule 41 Comment [1]









Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions







Rule 41 Comment [1]









Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions







Duties to Tribunal














The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions











The Keys to Rule 41


material



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions



















Spaulding Holding


































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions































Term of Art









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions









Material



What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions


What is Material












Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions











Acceptable Puffing






























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions





























Improper Behavior























LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions





















LRPC 12(d)























Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions






















Questions


Slide Number 1

Program






The Conundrum

Sources of Rules

Negotiation Styles


DenverPhoenix Study

Hinshaw Study




Rule 41 Comment [1]


Duties to Tribunal




The Keys to Rule 41

False Statement




Spaulding Holding







Fact



Material

What is Material



Acceptable Puffing









Examples

Improper Behavior





LRPC 12(d)






Questions

john c. anjier - lba › files › john anjier - ethics - bcc 2011 materials.… · the conundrum...

Documents