In the most recent Professional Responsibility Column, "A Fresh Look at Advance Waivers," July 1, 2013, we reviewed prior articles in this column dealing with that topic in the context of an important new case from Texas, Galderma Laboratories v. Actavis Mid Atlantic, 2013 WL 655053 (N.D.Tex.), which significantly advanced the circumstances in which law firms might expect to be able to enforce advance waivers included in their engagement letters. Now there is a New York case, Macy's v. J.C. Penney, 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4798; 2013 NY Slip Op 4891 (June 27, 2013), which takes an even more robust view of the effectiveness of advance waivers, even against a client's subsequently expressed change of mind.
In addition to considering Macy's v. J.C. Penney, this column notes the changes recently adopted by the four Appellate Divisions to the text of the Statement of Clients' Rights which must be posted in all law offices pursuant to Rule 1210 of the Court Rules.
