Category Archives: Society

Replacing Prosecutors Who Can’t Indict a Ham Sandwich

Replacing Prosecutors Who Can't Indict a Ham Sandwich
Prosecutors Who Can’t Indict a Ham Sandwich

Prosecutors can get a grand jury to indict a “ham sandwich” as the famous New York Chief Judge Sol Wachtler once said.[1] If that’s the case, why has it been so hard to get an indictment over police officers blatantly accused of wrongdoing lately? Well let me explain. It’s almost like a Doctor who can’t do his job without nurses. If the Doctor gets his nurses fired, chances are, going forward; nurses will not be overly helpful in making sure the Doctor can get his job done. Similarly, prosecutors have  reciprocal relationships with police officers in the jurisdictions they serve. If police feel a certain prosecutor is out to the get them there is the possibility of evidence being lost, warrants not being served correctly, and forgetting to show up and testify in court!  Given the recent inability of prosecutors to sway grand juries to indict police misconduct, many are left wondering what can be done to address this increasing problem. Let us discuss prosecutors who can’t seem to indict a ham sandwich and why.

The Facts

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, “U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.”[2] I was no math major, but if my calculator serves me correctly, only .067 percent of indictments result in a “no true bill” which is where a grand jury fails to indict. Unfortunately, no specific national data exists for grand jury investigations on police officers, however there are numbers for specific districts. For example, “[i]n the 81 grand jury investigations of police shootings in Dallas between 2008 and 2012, only 1 decided to indict.”[3]

As it stands, the proportion of general population defendants actually charged with a crime versus law enforcement officers charged with a crime is at about 2 to 1.[4] Simply put, if you’re a police officer accused of a crime you have a 50% chance of not being charged for that crime compared to civilians.

Replacing Prosecutors Who Can't Indict a Ham Sandwich
Police are 50% less likely to be charged for a crime compared to civilians.

The Cato Institute’s report on National Police Misconduct shows that there were 4,861 unique reports of misconduct in 2010, including 127 fatalities associated with excessive force.[5] Further, a recent report issued by the Department of Justice on the Cleveland Police Department’s use of force shows that there is a consistent use of unreasonable force in the majority of its shootings. If police know that – statistically speaking – they are less likely to be held accountable for their action opposed to their civilian counterparts, nothing will curb this behavior outside of legislative intervention. Excessive force is the most prevalent and most consistent complaint against officers across the nation.

Replacing Prosecutors Who Can't Indict a Ham Sandwich
4,861 unique reports of misconduct in 2010, including 127 fatalities

What Can Be Done?

There is a general consensus among legal minds that the appointment of “special prosecutors” who work independently within the office of state attorney generals would be the most ideal option. “The special prosecutor’s responsibilities should be limited to the oversight, investigation and prosecution of police or public official misconduct, keeping them independent from other policing functions.”[6] Doing so would eliminate the “special bond” and working relationship prosecutors and police agencies currently share. Let’s face it, no one wants to see their colleagues go to prison , let alone be the one who sends them there for something that occurred during the course of their employment.

The use of special prosecutors is hardly new, however the appointment of one is typically decided on a case by case basis. By establishing an independent office solely responsible for police oversight, it removes the scenario of the police policing themselves. However, as with anything related to government there is always a concern for costs. As Joshua Deahl noted, the benefits far outweigh the costs. By establishing a specific office to investigate and prosecute police misconduct, it would save state governments the added cost of paying private legal fees. He noted, “[s]pecial prosecutors picked for a single investigation have little incentive to contain costs.”[7] Just as an example, taxpayers in Cook County, IL had to pick up a $1 million legal bill “when a high-profile lawyer was appointed to handle the prosecution of former Chicago Mayor Richard Daley’s nephew for his role in a bar fight that left a man dead.”[8]

Of course any changes would need to be implemented at the state level. State lawmakers take note; because there is already proposed legislation with bi-partisan support in Missouri aimed at requiring special prosecutors to head up all investigations involving officers and fatal shootings.[9] Though there is bi-partisan support, expect push-back from existing elected prosecutors and prosecutor associations. Many will contend state constitutional separation of power requirements forbids special prosecutor offices at the executive level. However, any notion that this hasn’t been done before is hogwash. The precedence of special prosecutors stems all the way up to the U.S Justice department down to state and local governments. This can be done, or at least the conversation can be started. My suggestion is that those who share the concerns of prosecutorial bias also reach out to their legislators and demand action at the state level.

Replacing Prosecutors Who Can't Indict a Ham Sandwich
Replacing Prosecutors Who Can’t Indict a Ham Sandwich


We can eliminate inner-office bias by simply removing the responsibility of garnering indictments from existing prosecutors who consistently work with police agencies facing charges. I completely understand the rock and hard place scenario these prosecutors are faced with. However, given the fact that so many citizens are losing their lives at the hands of police officers with little or no recourse, there must be ramifications for over-zealous officers to be aware of. The focus should be on replacing prosecutors who can’t indict a ham sandwich by appointing an independent agency responsible for greater police oversight.  Please share  and give feedback on ways to curb jurisdictional bias.


[1] Sol Wachtler: The judge who coined “indict a ham sandwich” was himself indicted, , (last visited Dec 5, 2014).

[2] It’s Incredibly Rare For A Grand Jury To Do What Ferguson’s Just Did | FiveThirtyEight, , (last visited Dec 5, 2014).

[3] judicial branch – What is the percent of Police Officers that are indicted by a Grand Jury? – Politics Stack Exchange, , (last visited Dec 5, 2014).

[4] Id.

[5] Police Killings Call for New Kind of Prosecutor – Bloomberg View, , (last visited Dec 5, 2014).

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] MO Rep, Sen want special prosecutors in all police shootings, , (last visited Dec 5, 2014).

Ethical Compliance and Cloud Services for Law Firms

Ethical Compliance and Cloud Services for Law Firms
Photo courtesy of LegalInk Magazine

Chances are, if you haven’t heard of the cloud, your head is probably in it! Today, cloud computing is becoming an essential element of personal and professional technology use. From our smartphones to our computers, both are increasingly becoming synchronized with cloud backup systems. From solo attorneys to big-box law firms, many are embracing cloud-based applications and backup options as a way of doing business. Here, we’ll discuss ethical compliance and cloud services for law firms.

You should be aware there are different platforms of cloud computing. Specifically, cloud computing is characterized as “large groups of remote servers networked to allow centralized data storage and online access to computer services or resources.”[1] The two main components of cloud based services boil down to data storage and applications that run locally but are processed in the cloud. It’s what those in the business refer to as Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) and Software as a Service (SaaS)respectively . The history of cloud computing dates back to 1969 but “since the internet only started to offer significant bandwidth in the nineties, cloud computing for the masses has been something of a late developer.”[2] The concept gained industry notoriety in 2006 when Amazon first developed its Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) model as the first commercial internet service allowing small businesses and individuals alike the ability to rent computers to run their own computer applications.[3]

Cloud Computing for Law Firms

For the most part, most cloud based application services offered to solo and small firms fall in the SaaS category. [4] Think of Clio, Rocket Matter, My Case, and Amicus cloud based case management platforms. However, many law firms and solo’s alike who don’t use SaaS based platforms have begun to use IaaS based platforms whether they know it or not. For instance, most iPhone users use iCloud to back up their devices even if not specifically intending to do so. Often times, when setting up a newly purchased iDevice, the setup steps require an iTunes log-in info. By doing so, iUsers inadvertently agree to have their digital content backed-up to Apples Cloud based storage. Don’t get me wrong, having a backup of your device’s content can be a Godsend if your device is lost or stolen. However, if you’re a lawyer who receives client related email or text messages on your phone, you just put confidential client information in a medium you neither are aware of, nor have control over.

Ethics Rules Possibly Affected by Cloud Computing

Under rule 1.1 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, the duty to “provide competent representation to a client” includes the duty to comprehend the cloud based technology services being used along with the duty to obtain client consent, and some cases the duty to counsel the client with regards to the use of cloud services in connection to representation. [5] Many states bar ethics committees have released opinions which generally permit attorneys to use “web-based storage services (like Google Docs and Dropbox) provided that the attorneys take reasonable steps to ensure their information is secure and not shared with third-parties.”[6] Given recent data breaches involving celebrity photos, cloud data security vulnerability is a very real possibility and should be paid close attention to. Moreover, if you aren’t even aware your client’s confidential information is being stored in the cloud, you certainly cannot claim to have taken reasonable steps to ensure their information is secure. To avoid any uncertainty, attorneys should be cognizant of what data is being backed up and where. Reasonable steps would include; routinely monitoring End User License Agreements, ascertaining where cloud providers store data, and keeping abreast of their retention policies.

Under, Rule 1.6, which includes an attorney’s duty to “exercise reasonable care to prevent . . . others whose services are utilized by the lawyer from disclosing or using confidential information of a client, comes another set of cloud related responsibility. “[7] Though some disclosure is permitted under RPC 1.6 where “the disclosure is impliedly authorized to advance the best interest of the client and is either reasonable under the circumstances or customary in the professional community,” an attorney should always know what the data is, where it’s located, and who has access to it. Granted these rules were designed to regulate traditional vendors such as storage facilities or copy services, they are also relevant to cloud computing as well.[8] Bottom line, cloud data storage is ethical so long as attorneys take “reasonable care to ensure the system is secure and the client confidentiality is maintained.”[9]

Under Rule 1.15, a lawyer has a duty to maintain and preserve client records and deliver them promptly upon request. Consequently, this applies to digital records kept locally and those maintained in the cloud, and making sure those files aren’t lost, stolen, or destroyed. Presumably, by using cloud-based backup services, you’re more than likely exercising the requisite reasonable efforts to maintain and preserve client records. Delivering client records upon request may be a sticking point for lawyers who use cloud based storage providers as we’ll get into next.

Pursuant to Rule 1.16, a lawyer has the “duty, upon termination of representation, to promptly deliver all papers and property to which the client is entitled,” which includes the work of cloud service providers.[10] Simply put, you must give the client all their files back after representation. However, if the cloud provider now legally owns the client’s digital content you uploaded, you can be in ethical violation of this rule. For instance, Google docs has a provision in their terms of service that states “when you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones.” To a layman it may appear that Google is seeking an ownership interest in the information you upload, however such licensing rights allow Google the ability store, transfer, and rewrite the data between multitudes of servers for backup purposes. To avoid RPC 1.16 pitfalls, I suggest understanding the terms of service between you and cloud providers.

Reasonable Precautions Attorneys Can Take to Ensure Client Info is Protected

There is a general consensus among ethic committees around the country that lawyers are ethically permitted to use cloud computing, however it should be noted that certain cases involving HIPAA, GLBA or FRCA may have additional restrictions. Overall, the general requirement is that lawyers take “reasonable precautions to ensure client information is protected from disclosure.”[11] Furthermore, the opinions all generally summate that attorneys will not be held as the guarantors of cloud based services. [12] As the New York State Bar Association put it, “the applicable standard is reasonable care, not strict liability,” and provided the following relevant guidelines attorneys should follow in exercising reasonable precautions. [13]

  1. Stay on top of emerging technologies to ensure client information is safeguarded.

  2. Research any cloud providers they are considering using to ensure the providers are well established, reputable, and have appropriate policies and practices to ensure that information is secure, properly handled, and backed up.

  3. Take steps to ensure that the vendor and its personnel are competent to perform the tasks required.

  4. Review all contracts and terms of service to ensure they comply with all ethical requirements.

  5. Take steps to ensure that service contracts: (a) require the cloud provider to safeguard client information; (b) have appropriate provisions about the ownership of data, handling of subpoenas and other legal process, and notification of data breaches; and (c) have appropriate end-of-contract or termination provisions, including the ability to retrieve data regardless of the reason for termination and proper procedures for deleting data from the cloud.

  6. Take steps to determine the geographical location of servers to ensure they are located in jurisdictions with adequate legal protections for data.

  7. Take steps to ensure that data stored in the cloud is accessible when needed, even if the contract is terminated or the vendor goes out of business.

  8. Protect against “end -user” vulnerabilities, such as the failure to use strong passwords or the use of unsecured Internet connections.

  9. Notify clients in the event of a significant data security breach.[14]


If ever unclear about a potential ethical dilemma involving client data or otherwise, simply pick up the phone and call your state bar for guidance. After all, it’s what you pay yearly membership fees for. For those who lack the time to scour end user license agreements the makers of EULAlyzer have created free software that will scan end user license agreements specifically in search of inconspicuous language which unfairly binds users to unfair terms. Bottom line, if you can document that you’ve taken reasonable steps to safeguard your clients data you should be fine.


[1] Cloud computing – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, , (last visited Nov 18, 2014).

[2] A history of cloud computing, , (last visited Nov 18, 2014).

[3] Id.

[4] New York City Bar Association – Ethics Overview – Ethics Panel, , (last visited Nov 18, 2014).

[5] Id.

[6] The Best Law Firm Case Management Software – An In-Depth Comparison, , (last visited Nov 18, 2014).

[7] New York City Bar Association – Ethics Overview – Ethics Panel, supra note4.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] Id.

Understanding Civil Forfeiture Laws

Understanding Civil Forfeiture Laws
Understanding Civil Forfeiture Laws

Has your personal property been naughty lately? If so, it could be sued by federal, state, and municipal governments resulting in a good ole bona fide Fourth Amendment seizure. Also known as civil forfeiture, the practice has been around for decades. Although once generally limited to suspected drug dealers, with increasing bureaucratic budget shortfalls, its’ becoming widely used by government agencies as a source of department revenue across the nation.

Civil Forfeiture on the Federal Level

Civil forfeiture is codified on the federal level by 18 U.S.C. § 981 (paralleling 18 U.S.C. § 982) and 21 U.S.C. § 881.[1] Essentially, the government initiates civil actions against the property itself, not the owner to remedy a harm, through the fiction of the property’s “guilt.”[2] The result, if your property has been naughty – I.e., involved in or an instrumentality to a crime – it may be seized by the government without its’ owner (you) ever being charged or convicted of a crime. With regards to the guilt or lack thereof of the property’s owner, the Supreme Court ruled that Due Process does not require pre-seizure notice or hearing, and that the innocence of the owner is not a general defense.[3] What’s worse, state and local governments have since jumped on the bandwagon implementing their own form of civil forfeiture laws punishing naughty property by seizing it, selling it for 100% profit, and then incorporating the funds into their general operating budget.

Understanding Civil Forfeiture Laws
State & Local Civil Forfeiture

Civil Forfeiture on State and Local Levels

Originally the law was designed to give the federal government the authority to seize drug kingpin property used in illegal drug trafficking. For instance, if a drug trafficker was using his private plane or boat to transport narcotics, under the; RICO, Criminal and Drug Forfeiture Acts, the Feds could legally confiscate those items in order to prevent further trafficking. However recently, state and local level civil forfeiture laws have given local police departments the authority to forfeit personal items such as a jewelry, cash, homes and essentially anything else that can be sold. As noted, though the property owners are never charged, local & state agencies can bring action against the item itself leading to nonsensical forfeiture case names such as State of Texas vs. One Gold Crucifix or South Dakota v. Fifteen Impounded Cats.[4]

Here, in State of Texas vs. One Gold Crucifix, the “police confiscated a simple gold cross that a woman wore around her neck after pulling her over for a minor traffic violation.” [5] Since the defendant in civil forfeiture cases is the property itself, the rights of the owner have no bearing on the outcome. As a result, many individuals whose property is confiscated simply choose not to fight due the high costs of legal fees.

Further, one jurisdiction in particular, Philadelphia, PA, engages in the most notorious and aggressive civil forfeiture tactics in the country. Specifically, in a recent case involving a couple whose son was caught selling $40 worth of narcotics outside their family home, Philadelphia authorities sought to confiscate the couple’s entire home, sell it at auction, then retain the profits. As a result, The Institute for Justice has taken on the couples – and others similarly situated – case(s) filing a class action lawsuit seeking an injunction against the City of Philadelphia to halt what it refers to as “violations of rights guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Defenses to Civil Forfeitures

As noted, unless provided by statute, the innocence of the owner is generally not a defense to a civil forfeiture. Even where statutory defenses are available, they are narrowly construed by the courts. [6] For example, “courts may apply an objective standard to determine if the owner should have had knowledge of the property’s illegal use, rather than require proof of actual knowledge.”[7]

In certain situations, owners may be able to argue that if no crime occurred, the government lacks probable cause, “or that the property is not closely enough connected to the crime to be considered an instrumentality or proceeds.”[8] Even where the government is required to return the property seized, it is not liable for any further damages resulting from its confiscation, nor any interest ordinarily accrued on actual forfeited funds.

Proposed changes

On the national level there has been chatter on reforming federal civil forfeiture statutes however not much has been done. There is bi-partisan support for the proposed Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act proposed by Tim Walberg (R-Mich) however it faces an uphill battle in the Judiciary Committee.

Currently, North Carolina is the only state in the country that prohibits civil forfeiture unless the owner of the property has been convicted of a crime. A state lawmaker in Virginia, Delegate Mark Cole, is proposing legislation in the 2015 general assembly to curtail current civil forfeiture statutes.[9] Hopefully other lawmakers will catch on as this little known, seemingly secret process is being brought to light.

Understanding Civil Forfeiture Law
Now that Its Affecting Many more Americans than Originally Intended . . .


If your property has been naughty or even has the inclination of naughtiness, have a sit down with it and explain the ramifications of its behavior. If that sounds ludicrous, so does the governments rationale for seizing it! My theory is that since this practice was primarily directed at inner-city “drug dealers” many Americans simply didn’t care. Once its pervasiveness started sprawling into suburban America, it now has become a problem that needs reform. It’ll be interesting to see how much government the limited government folks will tolerate once their loved ones and neighbors are affected.



[1] Forfeiture | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information Institute, , (last visited Nov 6, 2014).

[2] Id.

[3] Calero Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663 (1974).

[4] Civil forfeiture perverts justice – Technician: Opinion, , (last visited Nov 6, 2014).

[5] Id.

[6] Forfeiture | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information Institute, supra note1.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] State lawmaker targets civil forfeiture | Alexandria Times, , (last visited Nov 6, 2014).

What’s in that End User License Agreement?


I recently updated my iPhone to the new iOS and  like any other software update, new service or application there was a lengthy user agreement that required me to click “OK” before proceeding. Not unlike just about everybody else on the planet, I agreed without actually reading the user agreement in order to proceed. It got me wondering, what exactly is this, and more importantly, what’s in that End User License Agreement (EULA) i just agreed to? Unfortunately, the former is easier to answer than the latter. Specifically, an End User License Agreement is a legal contract between a software application author or publisher and the end user of the software. Just to be clear, a contact is a legally binding agreement which creates an enforceable obligation by law, and a license is simply a grant by the holder of intellectual property to another to exercise a certain privilege.

So What the Hell’s In It?

On the most basic level, an end user license agreement is somewhat similar to a rental agreement where the user agrees to pay for the privilege of using the software. Additionally, in most cases, the end user is also agreeing not to inappropriately copy, alter, or disseminate the software without proper permission. Although, under 17 U.S.C. § 117, an end user is absolutely free to use, archive, re-sale and make backups of any proprietary software he or she has purchased.

More commonly, end user license agreements serve to limit the liability of the application developer in case the software essentially damages your computer, loses your data, or results in your iPhone being “bricked.” Speaking of Apple, it seems to be well settled among actual EULA readers that Apple’s end user license agreements tend to be some of the most far reaching over-broad agreements that exist. For example, Apples EULA for its eBook authoring software contains language restricting an author’s use of any and all content produced using Apple’s software! Huh? Yea, that means Apple essentially dictates what you can and cannot do with your content created by using their software! As Ed Bott noted, “[i]t’s akin to Microsoft trying to restrict what people can do with Word documents, or Adobe declaring that if you use Photoshop to export a JPEG, you can’t freely sell it.”

devil in the details

Everything but the Kitchen Sink!

Like my mother always said, “the devil is in the details,” however application developers and attorneys alike realize no one is likely to sift through those details which results in EULA’s containing so much content and legal jargon that end users simply won’t bother to read it. Often times a company’s end user license agreement is contrary to existing law. For instance, a EULA that restricts a user to making only one back up copy is clearly inconsistent with the rights granted under 17 U.S.C. § 117. Presumably, the lawyers who draft these agreements are fully aware of these conflicts; however, they choose to be cautiously over-broad than restrictively narrow. Take Apple iTunes end user agreement that prohibits “creating nuclear weapons!” Or other notoriously ridiculous EULA clauses like Google Chrome’s insanely pervasive EULA that essentially gives Google ownership rights over everything up to and including your first born child! Read ” …you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.”

Click Here and You’re Ours!

Interestingly enough, the creepiness of mysterious end user license agreements appears to be so ubiquitous that the creators of South Park did a skit on the perils of not reading  end user license agreements and the rights you inadvertently relinquish when you “Click Here to Accept!“

Bottom line, unless you’re insanely board or have infinite amounts of time on your hands, chances are you’re unlikely to carve 15 minutes to an hour out of your day to painstakingly analyze EULA’s before enjoying the brand new toy you just downloaded. I would suggest following Ed Bott’s blog who reads EULA’s so the rest of us won’t have to. Additionally, the makers of EULAlyzer have created free software that will scan end user license agreements specifically in search of inconspicuous language which unfairly binds users to unfair terms. Good luck!

Increase Professional Marketability as a Junior Associate

Incrase Professional Marketability as a Junior Associate
Increase Professional Marketability as a Junior Associate

Amid a recent round of layoffs at the mid-level firm I’m employed at, it was brought to my attention that, among those who were laid off, the overwhelming majority did not bring business into the firm. This led me to understand the concept that there are only two types of lawyers, as John Remsen Jr put it, “there are lawyers with clients, and there are lawyers who work for lawyers with clients.” I found myself wondering how not to be the latter, how to bring in clients and increase  professional marketability as a junior associate. I soon discovered, like anything else in life, it requires a bit of hard work and persistence.

Volunteer to Author Your Firms Legal Blog

First and foremost, my personal advice is to learn the coveted art of blogging. Clearly I’m a bit biased, however most law firms, from big to small, have begun to recognize the added benefit of maintaining a legal blog. Studies continuously show that that daily blog updates brings in new clients. If you can establish yourself as a leader in your firm’s blogging and networking in the legal community, you’ll set yourself apart from other associates waiting for work to be handed to them. Offer to author several blogs for your firms’ website, and if your firm doesn’t maintain a blog then you have a surefire way of drumming up some work that you’ll have creative control over.

Specialize in a Niche Practice Area

Next, when it comes to bringing in clients as a junior associate, drill down on a specific practice area you have a passion for. Specializing in a niche area of law can only improve your upward mobility in an emerging field. Start by staying on top of current events, new laws and particular niches within your practice area. By accurately conveying novel legal nuances in your practice area you’ll establish yourself as an emerging expert. You’ll find yourself being that go-to associate for partners involved in your area of interest. They say that reading one hour per day in your chosen field will make you an international expert in just 7 years. Just think what you can achieve by dedicating time to an area you’re already passionate about.

Increase Professional Marketability as a Junior Associate
Dress to Impress

Dress to Impress and for Success

Seriously, dress the way you would visualize a well-polished attorney dressing. No matter what, humans are visual beings and how you present yourself will go a long way in establishing credibility. As Mr. Remsen pointed out, “very few clients will fault you because you look too nice. Dressing in a suit for work or meetings sends a message of ultimate respect and that you are serious about your business. Your presentation and ‘packaging’ sets a tone.” I’m often accused of being over-dressed at work or asked if I’m appearing in court, my response is usually “dress for the job you want, not the job you have,” followed by how “I’m gunning for the Solicitor General position!” Bottom line, you are your primary marketing platform so make sure you invest heavily in it! For more tips, read how “Lawyers Should Look Like Lawyers” here.

Increase Professional Marketability as a Junior Associate
Network to Get-Work!

You Have to Network to Get-Work!

This is probably the most import segment on improving your marketability an improving your ability to bring in clients as a junior associate, so read carefully. Try to actively participate in your states bar association. Specifically, join the bar sections that encompass your practice area, offer to participate in CLE’s, attend meetings, and work towards leadership positions. The Remsen Group suggests becoming board certified in your identified niche area if available in your state.

Create and maintain a networking list. You’ve heard it law school and you’re probably hearing it again in practice, you have to network to get-work! Business cards are meant to be distributed, not collect dust in the box they came in. Quite frankly, if you’re not going through boxes of business cards during your tenure at a firm, you’re doing it wrong! Of course we all want high-end clients who bring valuable business to our firms; however, chances are you’re not going to run into those types of clients at your local hole-in-the-wall pub. Simply put, you need to be where the money is! For example, I popped into an art gallery one evening with a friend to kill some time before another event. There was free wine and hors d’oeuvres so we stayed and was soon approached by a gentleman who introduced himself as the owner of the gallery and artist. A few glasses of wine and several stories later, we’d struck up a genuine affinity towards each others crafts. I would later discover this gentleman was one of the most premier real estate developers in the state! Though he is currently satisfied with the law firm he has, I make it a point to keep in contact, whether it be lunch or a quick phone call just in case. The point is, had we chose to go to Hooters to watch the game; the likelihood of meeting a high value possible client would have been significantly lowered. You have to cultivate great relationships that can potentially transform into great business opportunities. Keep in touch by sending birthday wishes or sharing relevant articles or best practices in the field they work in or connecting via social media.

The New York Bar association noted that, “by developing a book of business as an associate, you can increase your profile at [your] firm and get yourself noticed, while putting some extra money in the bank as well.” The bottom line is that if your firm doesn’t have the funds to sustain your salary then you’ll likely be the first out the door unless you bring in clients as an associate. My firm’s manager emphatically expressed how great the attorneys who got laid off were as people, but sharply distinguished them from other lawyers who brought in their own billing. It’s understandable that not everyone has an extrovert personality or the wherewithal to maintain interpersonal relationships, if so, start with these simple networking tips to overcome shyness.

So if you want to be the lawyer with clients as opposed to the associate waiting for a hand-out, coincide your firms overall success with your success. Make sure to find an area you’re passionate about while keeping your outwardly appearance fresh and clean and most importantly,  don’t forget that you have to network-to-get-work!

Break Your Lease Without Breaking the Law

How to break a lease

We’ve all been there before, when life’s circumstances simply don’t align with your existing contractual obligations. Whether it’s a cell phone or gym membership contract there can be stiff penalties for early termination. However, if it’s an actual rental agreement, knowing how to break your lease without breaking the law will leave you with more options than taking a financial hit over the head like a cell phone plan or gym membership.

Generally, a rental agreement is defined as any agreement, either oral or in writing, between a lessor (owner) and lessee (renter) which gives the lessee exclusive use of the premises for an agreed upon time for an agreed upon price. Simply put, it’s the long packet of documents you initialed and signed when you leased your apartment. However, note that even oral rental agreements are valid if the length of the rental agreement is for less than one year.

How to break a lease
Read, then Re-Read Your Lease Agreement

Steps to Take When Breaking Your Lease

As Nicole Schreck pointed out, there are generally three steps you should take when you plan to break a lease. First and foremost, you should thoroughly read through your rental agreement. Many apartments, property managers and landlords alike use generic rental agreements which usually contain similarly generic language. Included in that language is what’s called an “opt-out clause.” Opt-out clauses specifically stipulate what is required to break a lease, what you’ll be responsible for and how much notice should be given to the owner or property manager. Some opt-out clauses require that you give up to two months’ notice to the landlord, owner, or property manager.

Secondly, and the most important step after becoming aware of your changed circumstances and the contractual requirements of the lease is to talk to your landlord and/or property manager. Depending on the relationship you have with your landlord and the exclusivity of the property, they may be willing to work with you in getting the premises re-leased. Often times, where we anticipate a large legal fall-out, good-ole-fashion interpersonal communication can easily resolve a matter. Since the ultimate goal is replacing you as a tenant, communicate with your landlord your willingness in helping to find an alternative renter or sub-lessor.

Lastly, find a new tenant. In many jurisdictions a landlord is responsible for mitigating any financial losses before legally pursuing damages from you as a tenant. Simply put, the landlord cannot let the premises sit vacant while the unpaid rent accumulates then go after you for the unpaid rent. By personally finding a new tenant, you ensure there is minimal vacancy, which in turn, reduces the chances of any adverse action against you as a former tenant. Alternatively, if the landlord is left to finding a replacement tenant, he or she may lease the premises for a lower rate than you leased it for thus allowing the landlord to seek damages for the difference between your original lease price versus the new leased price.

Break your lease
Find a New Tenant

Special Circumstances in Breaking a Lease

There are special circumstances where a lessee can legally break a lease without any legal consequences. Those include (1) inhabitable living conditions, (2) military deployment, and (3) death or incapacity. Hopefully, it’s not for the latter! It should be noted that some leases procured through a real estate agent will allow the lessee the option to place the premises back on the MLS. However, the lessee is still responsible for rent throughout the listing and showing period in addition to the remaining commission owed to the agent which is usually around 6% of the monthly lease rate for the remainder of the lease.

So if life has dealt you some incongruent circumstances that simply aren’t compatible with your contractual obligations, namely the lease you signed, relax, there are options. If you’re fretting over how to break a lease without breaking the law, knowing all your options before making any decisions is key to avoiding unnecessary headaches. Read, then re-read the agreement you signed. Speak candidly to your landlord; explain your circumstances along with your willingness to help avoid any disruption in tenancy. Then personally make an effort to find a replacement tenant.

Are you Required to show ID to Police?

Are you Required to show ID to Police in Arizona?
Are You required to Show ID to Police?

Are you Required to show ID to Police ? Depends. Generally, interactions between police and the general public fall into three categories: (1) consensual, (2) detention, or (3) arrests.

First, under consensual interactions between a citizen and the police, the individual approached is not required to identify himself or answer any other questions and generally is free to leave at any time. To determine if the interaction is consensual, start by asking the officer if you’re free to leave. Obviously, if the officer answers or acts in any manner contrary to the affirmative, this is not a consensual encounter and a more complex set of rules may apply under the detention or arrest category.

Secondly, circumstances where a reasonable person would not believe he or she is free to leave will constitute a detention. Under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the police have the right to briefly detain an individual where a reasonable articulable suspicion exists that the person has, is, or is about to commit a crime. These are known as Terry Stops, and are generally limited to a pat-down to determine if a person is carrying a concealed weapon. However, many states, including Arizona have adopted “stop and identify” laws that require persons detained under Terry Stop like conditions to identify themselves by producing identification or supplying identifying information. We’ll touch on what is required below.

Lastly, while a detention only requires reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, an arrest requires probable cause that a person has actually committed a crime. You’ll likely know whether you’re under arrest when the officer says so, however sometimes a detention can morph into an arrest once the officer has secured probable cause to determine an individual had indeed committed a crime. At that point, the police may lawfully search an individual’s person; belongings and anything within his general “grab area.”

So . . . do I Have to Show My ID to The Police or Not?

Are you Required to show ID to Police?
States with Stop and Identify laws

It depends on which jurisdiction you live in, whether you are operating a motor vehicle, and whether they’ve adopted “stop and identify” statutes. Currently, there are about 24 states that have “Stop and Identify” laws in place, locate your state here. Under Arizona law, specifically, A.R.S §§ 28-1595, 28-3169 the operator of a motor vehicle is required by law to produce identification to a requesting officer during a traffic stop. If you’re driving a car on Arizona public roads you have constructively consented to supplying ID to police upon request. Failure to do so will result in a class 2 misdemeanor.

If You’re Not Driving a Car

Basically the requirement to show ID to the police upon request will always turn on whether the police have reasonable suspicion that you are involved in criminal activity. You can determine that by simply asking the officer if you are free to leave. If not, then most likely you’re required to show ID to the police upon request. The same applies whether you are a passenger in a car, or whether you are walking down the street. In the former, the police must reasonably suspect you are involved in either a traffic or a criminal violation to require you to show ID upon request. If you are walking down the street and the police reasonably suspect you have committed either a criminal or municipal violation they may lawfully require you to show ID to police upon request.

Here, Arizona ID requirements, under A.R.S § 13-2412, stipulates that by refusing to provide a truthful name when lawfully detained will constitute a class 2 misdemeanor. Be aware that you are only required to give your name and/or ID, and are not compelled to answer any other questions by an officer.

The Bottom Line

Bottom line, there are two ways to determine whether you are required to show ID to the police; (1) if you’re operating a motor vehicle, the answer is always yes, and (2) if you’re reasonably suspected of committing a traffic, municipal, or criminal violation the answer is yes. Again, the most simple way of determining this is by simply asking the officer politely “am I free to leave?” even if you are a passenger in a car. So the next time you question whether you are required to show ID to the police, determine whether the encounter is consensual, a detention, or an arrest before refusing to do so in order to mitigate further trouble. Check out this great clip provided by that recaps our discussion.

Note – the aforementioned article, rules, and laws are in no way presented to constitute legal advice. Nor are they meant to apply to any set of specific facts pertaining to your circumstances.

Who Really Owns that Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See?

Who Owns that Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See
Who Really Owns that Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See

Who Really Owns that Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See? In the wake of the recent iCloud private celebrity pictures posted on 4chan, an image-based bulletin board, let us discuss the true ownership and recourse of posting pictures you don’t want anyone to see. Generally, under United States Copy Right law, the owner of a photograph is classified as the person who took the picture. Along with that ownership, comes certain rights to the photograph. Specifically, under U.S Copyright Act at 17 U.S.C 106, the owner has the right to (1) reproduce the photograph, (2) prevent any derivative works based on the photograph, (3) distribute copies to the public by sale, lease or lending, and (4) display the image to public.

So if the picture you don’t want anyone to see is the result of a “selfie” then you have the sole right to prevent any unauthorized distribution, public viewing and display of your work. However, on the other hand, if a third party took the picture, even with your camera, technically they would be considered the true owner of the picture you don’t want anyone to see. As a result, they could potentially release, transfer, lend, or display to the public the picture you don’t want anyone to see.

If You took the Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA), enacted in 1998, there exists what’s called a “Safe Harbor” provision. The “safe harbor” provision allows the owner (you) of pictures you don’t want anyone to see, the ability to issue a takedown notice to digital content platforms such as Reddit, YouTube, FaceBook, etc. to remove the content you’d like to prevent anyone else from viewing. A digital content provider could be found contributorily liable for copyright infringement if they do not quickly adhere to your takedown notice.

If You Didn’t Take the Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See

Who Really Owns that Picture You Don’t Want Anyone to See

Well, unfortunately, you fall under the distinct legal category of S.O.L, and I’m not talking about statute of limitations. There may be some alternative legal recourse such as intentional infliction of emotional distress, or invasion of privacy, however strong affirmative defenses exist to these claims lending to costly litigation. Bottom line; know who you’re engaging with when it comes to sensitive photographic subject matter. Not everyone will have your best interest at heart when things turn for the worse. If you must take pictures you don’t want anyone to see, enjoy the pictures for the time being, then destroy them would be the best advice I could give.

Attorney Fees, First Step in Preventing Prosecutorial Misconduct

Awarding attorney fees for criminal acquittals would be a first step in preventing prosecutorial misconduct. For instance, in a the State of Washington, there exists little known statutory and case law stipulating that if a person is unsuccessfully prosecuted by the state, where a claim of self-defense is asserted, the state must reimburse the defendant for reasonable cost incurred.

Specially, the Revised Code of Washington statute 9A.16.110 states that ; when a person charged with a crime listed in subsection (1) of this section is found not guilty by reason of self-defense, the state of Washington shall reimburse the defendant for all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense. RCW 9A.16.110 Furthermore, case law interpreting the statute held that “when a jury acquits a defendant and finds that the defendant acted in self-defense, the State must pay for post-acquittal fees and costs reasonably incurred in the trial or appellate courts.” STATE v. DUGAN, July 1999 96 Wn. App. 346

Attorney fees for prosecutorial misconduct

Given the abundance of wrongful convictions; based on new evidence, DNA testing, and even prosecutorial misconduct, Washington State’s obscure rules raise interesting questions on why this isn’t allowed in all general criminal cases. Well settled civil recourse allows a prevailing defendant in frivolous civil litigation the right to sue the opposing party for legal fees. Consequently, however, no such remedies exist in criminal cases. Generally, prosecutors enjoy free range with unlimited immunity when prosecuting criminal cases. So much so, only once in the history of the criminal justice system has a prosecutor ever been convicted of wrongful prosecution. Even there, convicted prosecutor Ken Anderson, who wrongfully prosecuted the case of Michael Morton by hiding exculpatory evidence, was only sentenced to 10 days in jail. Though in addition, he was required to relinquish his license to practice law, Anderson was 61 years old, well on his way to retirement. Hardly analogous to the punishment Mr. Morton received who served over 20 years in prison before being exonerated. With so little motive for deterrence, coupled with career aspirational goals of high prosecution rates, many prosecutors proceed with cases knowing full well they would have little chance of a jury conviction aware that 97 percent of federal cases and 94 percent of state cases end in plea bargains.


To be clear, prosecutorial misconduct is defined as “an illegal act or failing to act, on the part of a prosecutor, especially an attempt to sway the jury to wrongly convict a defendant or to impose a harsher than appropriate punishment.” Take Brooklyn, New York for example, where USA Today reported that in just six months of observation, seven people were exonerated after prosecutorial misconduct was discovered. The California Innocence Project reported that in wrongful conviction cases, “prosecutorial misconduct was a factor in from 36% to 42% of the convictions.” Since prosecutors have little or no fear of consequences, many continue to prosecute criminal cases at their own discretion, having only their conscious as a benchmark for integrity. However, there are steps we can take to remedy the seemingly “too big to fix” criminal justice system.



There needs to be some form of consequential repercussions for irresponsible prosecutors. Legislation is the only tool that can reign in rampant prosecutorial misconduct. First, a good start would be expanding cases where the state would be liable for attorney fees where a defendant is acquitted. Modeling legislation after Washington States self-defense laws, a number of jurisdictions can at the very least give innocent defendants one less reason to plea. Second, increasing the likelihood of criminal prosecution for prosecutorial misconduct would be a deterrent. As noted above, the 10-day sentence of convicted prosecutor Ken Anderson, certainly would not strike fear into the heart of an over-zealous prosecutor, however it would make him or her think twice.

In addition to statutory fee reimbursement and prosecutorial convictions, jurisdictions would be well served by establishing special conviction review units such as the one expanded in Brooklyn. “The practice of naming a special unit dates back to 2007 when Dallas County, Texas District Attorney Craig Watkins started his Conviction Integrity Unit. Since then, the unit has reviewed more than 1,000 cases and exonerated 33 people. Watkins said 90 percent of the exonerations his office has done involved witness misidentification using a photo lineup.” Even a 3 percent wrongful conviction rate is excessive. The government should always have a higher duty of care when potentially infringing upon a citizens liberty interests. Simply put, more needs to be done to address the community’s distrust of law enforcement and the ubiquitous sentiment that innocent people going to jail is a natural consequence of our flawed criminal justice system.


Dred Scott Case

In conclusion, more needs to be done to change the attitude of both law enforcement and the general public. If ten guilty people must go free to avoid the incarceration of just one innocent person, then so be it. This country was founded upon the substratum that its citizens shall enjoy freedom, liberty and justice for all. However, given the fact that so much prosecutorial misconduct errs against minorities it would seemingly appear the majority opinion in, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), stating that people of color “had no rights that the white man was bound to respect” may still ring true till this day.

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

digital estate planning in a digital age
Don’t get locked out of digital assets

In more recent history, a news story circulated through social-media spheres involving a lawsuit by Bruce Willis against Apple Inc. involving his right to transfer ownership of his vast iTunes collection to his heirs. Though the story was debunked by his representatives, it raised an interesting dilemma surrounding the ownership of digital assets and the transferability of those assets posthumously. Digital estate planning in a digital age has become increasingly relevant.

In our increasingly digital world there is a greater need to protect the digital assets we increasingly amass over time. Digital content is referred to “any information that is published or distributed in a digital form, including text, data, sound recordings, photographs and images, motion pictures, and software.” [1] Digital assets include such digital content as one’s online persona, passwords to the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, and blogs. [2] Currently, there are only five states that have laws governing digital estate planning. [3] As a result, an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions lack statutory guidelines governing digital asset bequeathment leaving loved ones lacking legal recourse. Traditional estate planning plays a major role in protecting both tangible and intangible assets alike, however has been slow to evolve with emerging technology.

Traditional Estate Planning

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age
Digital & Traditional Estate Planning

Essentially, one’s estate amounts to anything a person owns, tangible or intangible. Traditional estates are defined as a person’s interest in land or other property. [4] Generally, a person’s estate consists of traditional assets defined as items that are owned and have value. [5] Accordingly, traditional estate planning primarily involves the posthumous disposition of property typically involving a three step process. [6] First, there is a consultation to consider an individual’s present and lifetime needs. [7] Second, and most importantly, a thorough plan designed around meeting those needs during the client’s lifetime. [8] Last but not least, traditional estate planning involves the creation of a unified estate plan, which balances the client’s needs during his/her lifetime with the needs of his estate after death. [9] Nonetheless, our increasingly digital world has created a whole new class of assets that traditional estate-planning tools may not be equipped to handle, including the ability to legally transfer a decedent’s ownership of digital assets. As such, digital estate planning in a digital age is evermore important.

Digital Estate Planning

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age
Digital assets include online persona’s

Digital estate planning not only promotes alienability of ownership, but it also:

  • Makes life easier for the estate’s executor and family members.
  • Impedes identify theft.
  • Protects decedent’s intellectual property interest.
  • Preserves a decedents digital legacy [10]

Currently, there is no standard to bequeath ones digital estate, however digital estate planning can be something as simple as executory guidelines constituting a letter to one’s executor listing important URLs, usernames, passwords, security codes, and other information needed to access online accounts. [11] Since one of the most common forms of digital assets is licenses which are fully transferable within a trust, author Joseph M. Metrek suggests providing clients with a “Digital Asset Revocable Trust” (DART). [12] Essentially, the DART, like a traditional trust, will retain ownership of digital assets beyond the life of the grantor. Therefore, a trustee would have the authority to manage and transfer authorizing licensing agreements to a client’s heirs based on the needs established when the estate was created.

In addition, an executor or fiduciary can mitigate the amount of personal hardship and grievance associated with digital estate planning by following a simple set of guidelines. [13] Experts recommend fiduciaries implement the following crucial steps when administering a decedent’s digital estate:

  • Seek the assistance of technical help if necessary.
  • Work on consolidating virtual assets to as few “platforms” as possible (e.g. have multiple e-mail accounts set to forward to a single e-mail account.
  • Obtain statements (or data) of the prior twelve months of the decedent‘s important financial accounts.
  • Consider notifying the individual [sic] in the decedent‘s e-mail contact list and other social media contacts.
  • Change passwords to those that the fiduciary can control (and remember).
  • Keep all accounts open for at least a period of time to make sure all relevant or valuable information has been saved and all vendors or other business contacts have been appropriately notified, and so all payables can be paid and accounts receivable have been collected.
  • Remove all private and/or personal data from online shopping accounts (or close them as soon as reasonably possible).
  • The fiduciary should plan on archiving important electronic data for the full duration of the relevant statutes of limitations. [14]
Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age
Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age


Sadly, many will not implement traditional or digital estate plans, leaving their loved ones to sort out unfinished details of their lives. Estate planning traditionally has been a service primarily utilized by the elderly, however increasing awareness among tech savvy clients can reduce the ambivalence towards estate planning. Essentially, digital content owners face two distinct issues; (1) do they really own their online digital content and if so, (2) how can they pass that ownership or the use of that content on to their loved ones. One thing is for certain however, without digital estate mechanisms, such as DART’s or executory guidelines, even the likes of Bruce Willis would not be able to ensure his loved ones were legally entitled to his vast collection of Rob Zombie albums. Digital estate planning in a digital age is essential to pass on one’s legacy.


  1. What Happens When We Die: Estate Planning of Digital Assets, (last visited Aug 20, 2014).
  2. Michael Walker & Victoria D. Blachly, Virtual Assets, ST003 A.L.I –A.B.A 177 (2011)
  3. Alissa Skelton, Facebook After Death: What Should the Law Say?, MASHABLE (Jan. 26, 2012), Oklahoma, Idaho, Rhode Island, Indiana and Connecticut have all enacted laws regarding digital estate planning.
  4. BLACK‘S LAW DICTIONARY 626 (9th ed. 2009).
  5. Id. at 134.
  6. Jerome Solkoff, Scott Solkoff, What is elder law—Estate planning –.14 Fla. Prac., Elder Law § 1:3 (2011-12 ed.), FLA. PRAC., ELDER LAW, § 1:3.
  7. Id.
  8. Id.
  9. Id.
  10. Planning for digital assets, (last visited Aug 20, 2014).
  11. Joseph M. Mentrek, Estate Planning in a Digital World. 19 Ohio Prob. L.J. 195 (2009).
  12. Id.
  13. Walker & Blachly, supra note 2, at 182-85.
  14. See generally id. at 184-85