Legal Developments and Risk Management Tips Impacting the Professional Liability Community.
Cyber liability claims are on the rise. Recent breaches against Home Depot, Target and Walmart have grabbed media attention. However, it is not only large retailers who are targets for attack. In fact, the majority of attacks are directed to small businesses. According to a recent study, the average total insurance claim for cyber breaches against small companies is over $600,000 and the average for larger companies is close to $5 million. Are you prepared?
Recent developments in cloud-based computing have enabled professionals to perform an increasing amount of work remotely. Because professionals are no longer tied to the office, they are able to work more efficiently and better serve their clients. However, the use of third-party technology companies to store confidential client data raises several ethics concerns regarding the professional-client relationship.
Like all professionals, pharmacists owe a duty of care to their clients. The level of care and the specific duty owed, however, can vary depending on the jurisdiction. Historically, most states assign the duty to warn about the potential dangers, side effects or general usage of a drug to the physician or drug manufacture. Since pharmacists are not prescribing the medication, their potential liability is generally limited to scenarios involving the negligent filling of a prescription. However, a recent trend in the field has been expanding the potential liability of the pharmacists by holding them liable for failing to warn about a drug in certain situations or failing to consult the prescribing physician. A decision out of the state of Florida highlights this growing trend and creates a cause for concern in the profession.
The accountant-client privilege doesn’t seem to get as much attention as the other more commonly used privilege defenses such as attorney-client or doctor-patient. However, a case out of the Illinois Supreme Court earlier this year is giving the other “a/c privilege” a lot of press. While not all states recognize this privilege, the ones that do generally find that the client is the holder of the privilege and requires the client’s consent to disclose any information exchanged between the accountant and client. Illinois, however, has decided to take a slightly different approach.
Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis was recently jailed due to her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. In other news, a flight attendant refused to serve alcohol due to her religious beliefs. The public reaction to both situations was intense and the debate well-publicized. These events also highlight a new wave of confusion regarding the requirements facing employers with respect to religious accommodations. The answer for employers can differ widely depending upon the industry, jurisdiction, legislation and the specific interpretation of the laws at issue. Some states have enacted so-called religious freedom statutes and thus religious objectors have significant protections. Read on for tips to employers.
Hello, blog readers! We told you last month that Professional Liability Matters has been nominated in The Expert Institute’s “2015 Best Legal Blog Contest.” We have good news to share: We’ve made it to round 2!
Conflicts of interest are always a potential pitfall in the realm of attorney malpractice. The issue becomes even more complicated when tech-based clients enter the scene. What happens when two tech clients who are not directly adverse, but instead are potential competitors, both approach you for assistance?
Knowing the applicable statute of limitations for your case is critical for every attorney. In the world of legal malpractice, there are many variables in play: the jurisdiction, the facts, tolling and the extent of the underlying representation. Therefore, it’s important for attorneys to know the various nuances of the statute of limitations doctrine in their jurisdiction. For this reason, attorneys will want to take note of a recent decision out of the South Carolina Supreme Court that overruled precedent on when a legal malpractice claim begins to run.
Reportedly, more than 1,700,000 workers are injured annually as a result of workplace violence. We were recently reminded that disgruntled employees can be deadly. On August 26th, Vester Lee Flanagan, II murdered two of his former colleagues during a live news segment before taking his own life. This tragedy provides an opportune backdrop for employers to reassess preventative measures in place and disaster readiness in order to minimize the likelihood and impact of violence in the workplace.
We recently addressed the ethical implications of the initial, would-be client interview. As we discussed, the lawyer owes certain duties to a potential client and those duties vary from those owed to former and current clients. Whether an attorney-client relationship is actually formed can dictate whether a lawyer has a conflict of interest down the road when representing a new client. A recent decision out of the North Dakota Supreme court illustrates this concept.