ABA Guidance Details Obligations After Hurricanes, Other Disasters
The bar association's standing committee on ethics and professional responsibility published a formal ethics opinion related to disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding and fires, reminding lawyers of their specific ethical obligations when severe weather hits.
September 20, 2018 at 03:08 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
With hurricane season in full swing in the United States and climate scientists predicting more extreme weather in the future, the American Bar Association on Wednesday issued guidance on the ethical duties for lawyers whose practices are affected by natural disasters.
The ABA's standing committee on ethics and professional responsibility published a formal ethics opinion related to disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding and fires. The bar association's opinion seeks to remind lawyers of the specific ethical obligations—including those related to protecting client information and attorney advertising—that they should keep in mind when severe weather wreaks havoc in their area.
The ABA noted that among other issues, extreme weather can knock out power for extended periods of time and, in turn, could affect a lawyer's ability to be in contact with clients and banks that may be holding client or third-party funds in an attorney trust account.
“Lawyers have an ethical obligation to implement reasonable measures to safeguard property and funds they hold for clients or third parties, prepare for business interruption, and keep clients informed about how to contact the lawyers (or their successor counsel),” the ABA wrote in the ethics opinion.
The guidance isn't binding, but state bars often look to the ABA's model ethics rules and opinions when determining their own ethics rules and how they should be applied. Only the states of California, Louisiana and New York have issued ethics opinions dealing with disasters, according to the ABA.
Although the ABA opinion doesn't appear to be tied to any specific event, its release on Wednesday comes after an extended period of wildfires in the western U.S. and on the heels of Hurricane Florence's battering of the Carolinas, a storm that impacted law firms along with other residents in the region. Law firms in Texas were similarly affected in 2017 when Hurricane Harvey caused widespread flooding and damage in Houston and other parts of that state.
Ahead of Florence, some law firms took steps to both evacuate their staff in areas that were likely to be hit hard by the storm, and to safeguard client data and their own technology, ALM's Legal Tech News reported last week. Those types of protections, as well as communication with clients about lost documents, are a key focus of the ABA's ethics opinion.
Specifically, if a lawyer sees her or his files destroyed in a natural disaster, their ethical responsibilities differ depending on the “intrinsic value” of the document that's lost, the ABA wrote. Original copies of wills or property deeds would qualify as documents with intrinsic value; if those kinds of documents are destroyed and there's no electronic backup, lawyers have a duty to notify both current and former clients and to attempt to reconstruct the documents afterward.
“To prevent the loss of files and other important records, including client files and trust account records, lawyers should maintain an electronic copy of important documents in an off-site location that is updated regularly,” the ABA wrote. “Lawyers may also store files 'in the cloud' if ethics obligations regarding confidentiality and control of and access to information are met.”
Another key focus of the ABA's ethics opinion relates to lawyers who seek to represent victims in the wake of a natural disaster. As demonstrated in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, post-disaster lawsuits can result in fierce competition among lawyers. The ABA stressed that lawyers must pay close attention to the applicable attorney advertising and solicitation rules if they're trying to secure disaster victims as paying clients.
“Lawyers may want to offer legal services to persons affected by a disaster. The existence of a disaster, however, does not excuse compliance with lawyer advertising and solicitation rules,” the ABA wrote. The opinion went on to say that lawyers are generally prohibited from engaging in face-to-face solicitations where the prospective client doesn't have ample time to reflect and the lawyer is seeking a financial gain.
The solicitation rules apply differently, however, if lawyers are offering pro bono services to disaster victims, something that also happened after Harvey. The ethics opinion said lawyers are allowed to solicit potential pro bono clients in person, because in that situation, “the lawyer's motive does not involve pecuniary gain.”
Read More:
Law Firms Evacuate, Safeguard Data Ahead of Hurricane Florence
After Hurricane Florence, Legal Community Considers Next Steps
ABA Clarifies Rules on Lawyer Advertising (Sort Of)
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All12-Partner Team 'Surprises' Atlanta Firm’s Leaders With Exit to Launch New Reed Smith Office
4 minute readMorgan Lewis Shutters Shenzhen Office Less Than Two Years After Launch
After Breakaway From FisherBroyles, Pierson Ferdinand Bills $75M in First Year
5 minute readJudge Rejects Walgreens' Contractual Dispute Against Founder's Family Member
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250