Hot Off the Press - Recent Cases & Decisions 2019

Copyright © 2019 by DailyDAC, LLC d/b/a Financial Poise Webinars™
Receive our free weekly newsletter at www.financialpoise.com/subscribe
Insert the cover image for this webinar on this slide entirely
1

2
Practical and entertaining education for
attorneys, accountants, business owners
and executives, and investors.

3
DISCLAIMER
The material in this webinar is for informational purposes only. It should not be
considered legal, financial or other professional advice. You should consult with an
attorney or other appropriate professional to determine what may be best for your
individual needs. While Financial Poise™ takes reasonable steps to ensure the information
it publishes is accurate, Financial Poise™ makes no guaranty in this regard.
About this PowerPoint: if you are looking at this PowerPoint without the benefit of
listening to the conversation that surrounded it then you are doing yourself a disservice.
This PowerPoint was prepared in contemplation of being viewed in conjunction with
listening to a one hour webinar on the topic.

4
MEET THE FACULTY
Moderator:
Michelle Gershfeld – Law Office of Michelle Gershfeld
Panelists:
Michael Kasen – Kasen & Kasen
Bernie Burk – Formerly University of North Carolina School of Law
George Kuney – University of TN College of Law

5
ABOUT THIS WEBINAR:
Hot Off the Press- Recent Cases & Decisions
This webinar is for the lawyer- or anyone else- who wants to brush up on legal
ethics in the business context. The panelists discuss recent and important case law
in the area and explain how those decisions can have real word impact on the
situations you may be involved in. Among others, the following ethical model rules
are discussed: Rule 1.2-Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority
Between Client and Lawyer; Rule 1.7-Conflict of Interest: Current Clients; Rule 1.8-
Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules; Rule 1.9-Duties to Former
Client; and Rule 1.13-Organization as Client

6
ABOUT THIS SERIES:
Legal Ethics – Best Practices
Corporate scandals make the headlines periodically, but businesses and the lawyers that work with
them face ethical challenges every day, even in situations that are legally compliant. This webinar
series examines ethical issues confronted by businesses in a variety of contexts, from so called “grey
areas” to those involving outright corruption. The panels consider and recommend different
approaches to ethical decision-making and the lawyer's role in advising business clients. As with all
Financial Poise Webinars, each episode in the series brings you into engaging, sometimes
humorous, conversations designed to entertain as it teaches. And, as with all Financial Poise
Webinars, each episode in the series is designed to be viewed independently of the other episodes,
so that participants will enhance their knowledge of this area whether they attend one, some, or all
of the episodes.

7
EPISODES IN THIS SERIES
2/13/19 Episode #1:
Best Practice Regarding Technology
3/13/19 Episode #2:
Hot Off the Press- Recent Cases & Decisions
4/10/19 Episode #3:
How to Avoid Malpractice & Disciplinary Actions - General Do's and
Don'ts
Dates shown are premiere dates.
All webinars will be available
On Demand approximately 4 weeks
after they premiere.

8
Episode #2:
Hot Off the Press-
Recent Cases & Decisions

9
STORAGE AND COMMUNICATION OF CLIENT
INFORMATION
⚫ Overview: Act Reasonably
⚫ No hard and fast rules about encryption, firewalls, passwords, or other measures
⚫ Formal Ethics Opinion 477R
➔ Adopt a Process to:
✓ Assess risk
✓ Determine responsive security measures
✓ Verify effective implementation
✓ Update your approach in light of developments

1
0
INFORMATION (cont'd)
⚫ Assess Risks: Understand the Threats to Data – Especially Electronic Data – In Its
Various Locations
➔ Such as: unauthorized access; unauthorized disclosure; viruses; document
transfer to portable devices (and subsequent loss)
⚫ Act Reasonably in Determining Default Rules for Data Storage Locations and
Communication Methods
➔ See generally RPC 1.1, 1.6
➔ Act Reasonably when using Cloud Computing and Storage

1
1
INFORMATION (cont'd)
⚫ Evaluate When Additional Measures Are Needed to Protect Client Information
➔ Comment 18 and 19 to RPC 1.6 Confidentiality of Information encourage lawyers
to consider:
✓ Sensitivity of information
✓ Likelihood of disclosure if additional safeguards are not employed
✓ The cost of employing additional safeguards
✓ The difficulty of implementing the safeguards
✓ The extent to which the safeguards adversely affect the lawyer’s ability to
represent clients

1
2
CLOUD COMPUTING AND STORAGE
⚫ Ethics Opinions in 20 states
➔ States: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Nevada North Carolina,
Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin
➔ Compilation of rules is available at:
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/departments_offices/legal_technology_resources/resources/charts_fyis/cloud-ethics-
chart.html

1
3
CLOUD COMPUTING AND STORAGE (cont'd)
⚫ Bottom Line: Reasonable care standard
⚫ Common themes:
➔ Exercise care in selecting vendor
➔ Review terms of service
➔ Ensure that vendor protects confidentiality and access
➔ Investigate security measures and any security lapses

1
4
LEGAL AND NON-LEGAL SERVICES
⚫ Three New York Ethics Opinions in the last year that dealt with this issue:
➔ Opinion 1157:
✓ Offering legal and non-legal services through a single professional entity
✓ The standard of duty owed to clients of the non-legal services
➔ Opinion 1162:
✓ Payment of referral fees for the non-legal services
➔ Opinion 1155:
✓ Providing legal and non-legal services to the same client

1
5
CLIENTS WHO MAY BE BREAKING THE LAW
⚫ Proskauer Rose and Chadbourne & Parke pay multimillion-dollar
settlements in Alan Stanford investor class action
⚫ Duties and where they come from
⚫ New York City Bar Formal Opn. No. 2018-4: Duties When an
Attorney Is Asked to Assist in a Suspicious Transaction

1
6
DIGITAL CURRENY ISSUES
⚫ Accepting payment in digital currency
⚫ The Nebraska Lawyer Advisory Committee Opinion 17-03:
➔ Digital currency as payment, digital currency from third parties
as payment for the benefit of a client's account, and the ability
to hold digital currencies in trust or escrow for clients

1
7
ATTORNEYS AND SOCIAL MEDIA
⚫ Attorney misuse of social media
⚫ Rules that may be implicated:
➔ RPC 8.4(c) – Misconduct to engage in conduct involving “dishonesty,
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation”
➔ RPC 8.4(d) – Engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of
justice
➔ RPC 8.4(g) – Engage in harassment or discrimination

1
8
ATTORNEYS AND SOCIAL MEDIA (cont'd)
⚫ Attorney misuse of social media
⚫ Recent cases:
➔ Discipline sought against an Illinois attorney who created a fake
match.com account and took other actions online to harass opposing
counsel.
➔ Discipline sought against New York attorneys who took photos in a
courtroom (in violation of the rules of the court) and posted the photos
and commentary on social media.

1
9
⚫ Attorneys “friending” opposing parties, witnesses, or prospective jurors on
social media
➔ A lawyer is prohibited from communicating with a person represented by
counsel. RPC 4.2
➔ It is also a violation of professional conduct rules for a lawyer to ask
someone else (like a secretary or paralegal) to do what the lawyer is
prohibited from doing under the rules. RPC 5.3(c) and 8.4(a)

2
0
⚫ Even if the contract is not otherwise prohibited, if the lawyer falsely states her
identity in making a friend request, that would violate RPC 4.1 which prohibits
lawyers from making false statements of material fact.
⚫ Recent case: Ethics charges against a Pennsylvania prosecutor who set up a
fake Facebook account – and encouraged staff to use the account – to “friend”
defendants in pending cases.

2
1
⚫ Attorneys responding to negative reviews by clients
⚫ Attorneys must not reveal confidential information (i.e., information related to
the representation of the client) in response to an online review
➔ This can occur even if the client's name is not used
⚫ Those who do will face discipline for RPC 1.6 violation

2
2
⚫ Strategies for responding professionally, without revealing confidential
information:
➔ Stay away from information about the client, facts of the case, and your
interactions with the client
➔ State your desire for clients to be pleased with your representation
➔ Express your disappointment that this client is not pleased with your
service

2
3
CLIENTS AND SOCIAL MEDIA
⚫ Client privilege waiver through online posts
⚫ Attorney client privilege requires a confidential communication. If the client of that
communication is intentionally revealed by a client in an online post, privilege is
waived.
⚫ Work product protection also can be waived through disclosure.
⚫ Competent attorneys should protect the privilege by discussing these issues with
clients, providing memorable examples.
⚫ Examples:
⚫ Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 2010 WL 4286329 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2010)
⚫ Kintera v. Convio, Inc., 219 F.R.D. 503 (S.D. Cal. 2003).

2
4
INADVERTENT DISCLOSURE OF
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
⚫ Ethical and Legal Implications for Sending Attorneys
⚫ Act reasonably to prevent inadvertent disclosure
➔ RPC 1.1 competence; RPC 1.6(c) confidentiality. Comment [18] adds that
Rule 1.6 is not violated if disclosure occurs despite an attorney's
reasonable efforts
⚫ Common instance: In discovery and in electronic communication with
opposing counsel

2
5
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION (cont'd)
⚫ Ethical and Legal Implications for Sending Attorneys
⚫ Prevention
➔ Privilege Review (in litigation)
➔ Care in Using Email, such as checking email addressing before sending and
marking privileged documents privileged
⚫ Planning
➔ Clawback Agreements and Order – Fed. R. Evid. 502
✓ Do not borrow standard from Fed. R. Evid. 502(b)
✓ Seek client informed consent. Why?
⚫ Acting Reasonably to Mitigate the Damage when Inadvertent Disclosure Inevitably Occurs

2
6
⚫ Ethical and Legal Obligations of Receiving Attorneys
⚫ RPC 4.4(b) or Case Law
➔ “Notice only” approach – This is the Model Rules approach followed by
the majority of states
➔ “Notice+” approach – A receiving attorney must provide notice to the
sender and take other steps to protect the confidential information

2
7
⚫ Ethical and Legal Obligations of Receiving Attorneys
⚫ In civil litigation in federal court, FRCP 26(b)(5)(B), Fed. R. Evid. 502,
clawback agreements, and case law should also be considered.
➔ If the document was disclosed in discovery, the receiving attorney will
have to protect the confidentiality of the document in the short term, but
may decide to seek a court ruling that the privilege was waived, which will
turn on the clawback agreement or order (if there is one) or the court's
application of the waiver standard found in Fed. R. Evid. 502(b).

2
8
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, OLYMPIC EDITION:
THE MICHIGAN STATE MESS
Background:
➔ Dr. Larry Nasser sexually abused hundreds of girls and young women over many years
➔ Numerous Michigan State officials failed to respond appropriately to complaints while
the abuse continued
➔ Nasser was sentenced to 60 years in prison
➔ The University President, General Counsel, and numerous others lost their jobs
➔ Nasser's supervisor, William Strampel, the Dean of the Medical School, was criminally
indicted
➔ The University created a $500 million fund to meet victims' civil claims
➔ Litigation is ongoing

2
9
THE CURRENT MESS AT MICHIGAN STATE
⚫ Robert Young, Jr., former Michigan Supreme Court Justice and the fourth MSU General
Counsel in two years, was overseeing the Nasser-related litigation
⚫ The Clark Hill firm was representing Strampel in his criminal case and several others in
the pending civil case
⚫ Clark Hill publicly took the position that Strampel was complying with legal advice given
him by the MSU legal department
⚫ Young accused Clark Hill of a "conflict of interest" and fired them from everything except
the Strampel criminal case, citing an obligation to "cooperate" with MSU counsel
⚫ Was Young right to fire Clark Hill?
⚫ Did he articulate the right reasons?
⚫ Model Rule 1.8(f)(2): A lawyer shall not accept compensation for representing a client
from one other than the client unless . . . there is no interference with the lawyer's
independence of professional judgment or with the client-lawyer relationship . . . ."

3
0
LEGAL BILLS
⚫ The California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that a law firm’s invoices to a government
agency are exempt from disclosure only when they relate to active matters.
➔ Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. ACLU, S226645 (Dec. 2016)
➔ Legal bills sought under the Public Records Act in relation to suit against the
County for excessive force against inmates.
➔ Majority stated that a communication is privileged if made for legal consultation.
Legal bills are an accounting, and do not further legal representation.
⚫ Apply only to requests under Public Records Act? Broader application?
⚫ “The importance of the attorney-client evidentiary privilege to the proper functioning
of the legal system in this state cannot be overstated.” (Werdegar, J. dissenting)
⚫ RPC 1.5– Fees; RPC 1.6– Confidentiality

3
1
CHARGING LIENS
⚫ Delaware Supreme Court reinforced traditional definition and purpose of charging
liens.
➔ Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP v. Sutherland, C.A. No. 2399-VCS (Jan. 2017)
➔ A charging lien (or attorney's lien) imposes a security interest on financial
benefits conferred on the client as a result of the attorney's services in the
engagement
➔ In Delaware, the lien attaches to the entire benefit, even if some of the services in
the engagement did not "directly" cause that benefit
➔ Leaves open questions about how to define the engagement, and how related the
engagement has to be to the benefit for the lien to attach.
⚫ RPC 1.5– Fees; RPC 1.8(i)(1); RPC 1.16 Terminating Representation

3
2
CAN YOU CLAIM A CHARGING (OR
CONTRACTUAL) LIEN ON THE CLIENT'S FILE?
⚫ Most states strictly forbid it
⚫ A few states allow it

3
3
CONTINGENCY FEES
⚫ Texas Supreme Court
⚫ Law firm Jenner & Block withdrew from representing the client in a patent
infringement case after losing on summary judgment.
⚫ Firm now seeks a $4.4 million fee award.
⚫ Firm originally agreed to work on a contingency fee basis.
⚫ Client hired new counsel to get summary judgment reversed on appeal,
resulting in a $16.5 million settlement.
⚫ RPC 1.5– Fees

3
4
DIVISION OF FEES
⚫ ABA Formal Opinion 475 (Dec. 2016)
⚫ RPC 1.5(e) allows attorneys from different firms to split fees for joint
representation of a client.
⚫ If one attorney receives payment from the client, and another attorney has an
interest in that payment, then the other attorney is a “third person” under RPC
1.15(a), (d) for the purposes of fee division.
⚫ Hold other attorney’s portion in a separate account and notify him/her
promptly.

3
5
DUTY TO INFORM CLIENT ABOUT ERRORS OR
OMISSIONS: WHEN DO YOU HAVE TO TELL YOUR
CLIENT THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE BLOWN IT?
⚫ Whether or when there is a duty is surprisingly unclear
⚫ ABA Formal Ethics Opn. No. 18-481 (2018) interprets the duty of candor
(Model Rule 1.4(a)) to require disclosure when error or omission is "material"
⚫ Is it malpractice not to disclose?
⚫ CAUTION: Call your carrier first!
⚫ Are there practical reasons to fess up if you mess up?

3
6
WITHDRAWAL
⚫ ABA Formal Opinion 476 (Dec. 2016)
⚫ How much information may ethically be disclosed when seeking to
withdraw due to client’s failure to pay fees?
⚫ Withdraw for “professional considerations” under RPC 1.16 to attempt to
sidestep confidentiality issues under RPC 1.6.
⚫ Judicial sensitivity to ethical concerns.

3
7
LITIGATION FUNDING DISCLOSURE
⚫ U.S. District Court N.D. Cal. provision to judge’s standing orders
➔ Originally considered revising Civil Local Rules
⚫ Requires plaintiffs in proposed class, collective, and representative actions to
disclose any third-party funders of their litigation
⚫ RPC 1.6– Confidentiality

3
8
TECHNOLOGY-RELATED COMPETENCE OF
AN ATTORNEY
⚫ Key Authorities
⚫ RPC* 1.1 Competence, comment 8
➔ In this comment to the competence rule, attorneys are directed that they should
keep abreast of the benefits and risks of technology.
⚫ RPC 1.6 Confidentiality of Information
➔ Lawyers are obligated to take reasonable steps to prevent inadvertent and
unauthorized disclosure of or unauthorized access to client confidences.
➔ Comment 18 & 19 – These comments contain general advice regarding acting
reasonably to protect confidential client information.

3
9
TECHNOLOGY-RELATED COMPETENCE OF
AN ATTORNEY(cont'd)
⚫ ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 477R
➔ This formal Ethics Opinion addresses a number of technology-
related competence issues for attorneys.
⚫ *Throughout this PowerPoint, “RPC” refers to rule of professional conduct as
numbered in the vast majority of jurisdictions.

4
0
INTERNET, EMAILS & BLOGS
⚫ Alaska Ethics Opinion No. 2016-1
➔ Email Tracking, beyond read receipts, violates RPC 8.4(c) and may hinder
opposing counsel’s ability to keep client information confidential under
RPC 1.6.

4
1
INTERNET, EMAILS & BLOGS (cont'd)
⚫ California Formal Opinion No. 2016-196
➔ Attorney blogging integrated into a firm website or that offers legal
services may qualify as a communication subject to same restrictions as an
attorney advertisement.
➔ A stand-alone attorney blog on non-legal matters will not be considered a
communication even if it contains a link to the attorney’s firm website,
without more.

4
2
INTERNET, EMAILS & BLOGS (cont'd)
⚫ Colorado Formal Opinion No. 2017-130
➔ Ethical concerns when sharing or posting client information.
➔ RPC 1.6 does not provide an exception to expectations of confidentiality if
the information is shared for educational purposes, to help another lawyer,
or for “newsworthy” information.
➔ RPC 1.8– Conflict of Interest to Current Clients; RPC 1.9– Duties to
Former Clients; RPC 3.6– Trial Publicity

4
3
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MODEL RULE
1.6: CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION
⚫ Client-Lawyer Relationship
⚫ (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 representation, or the disclosure is permitted
by paragraph (b).
⚫ (b) A lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to
the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:
➔ (1) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm;

4
4
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MODEL RULE 1.6:
CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION (cont'd)
➔ (2) to prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that is
reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the financial interests
or property of another in furtherance of which the client has used or is
using the lawyer's services;
➔ (3) to prevent, mitigate or rectify substantial injury to the financial
interests or property of another that is reasonably certain to result or has
resulted from the client's commission of a crime or fraud in furtherance of
which the client has used the lawyer's services;
➔ (4) to secure legal advice about the lawyer's compliance with these Rules;

4
5
➔ (5) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy
between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal
charge or civil claim against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the
client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding
concerning the lawyer's representation of the client;
➔ (6) to comply with other law or a court order; or

4
6
➔ (7) to detect and resolve conflicts of interest arising from the lawyer's
change of employment or from changes in the composition or ownership
of a firm, but only if the revealed information would not compromise the
attorney-client privilege or otherwise prejudice the client.
⚫ (c) A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or
unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to
the representation of a client.

4
7
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE DUTY OF
CONFIDENTIALITY AND THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVLEGE: NATURE AND CONTEXT OF APPLICATION
⚫ The Attorney-Client Privilege is an evidentiary privilege against
compelled disclosure
⚫ The Duty of Confidentiality is a duty enforceable by professional
discipline or civil remedies forbidding voluntary disclosure

4
8
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY
AND THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVLEGE: SCOPE
⚫ The Attorney-Client Privilege applies to:
⚫ Confidential
⚫ Communications
⚫ Between attorney (and others essential to providing the attorney's services) and client
⚫ Regarding legal advice
⚫ The Duty of Confidentiality applies to:
⚫ ALL information the attorney obtains from any source in connection with the client's
engagement, except in limited circumstances for information that is "generally known”
⚫ ABA Formal Ethics Opn. No. 17-479 (2017) describes the scope of the "generally
known" exception

4
9
LESSONS FROM TRUMPWORLD: DID MICHAEL COHEN ACT
WRONGFULLY IN TAPING HIS PHONE CALLS WITH HIS THEN-
CLIENT, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DONALD TRUMP?
⚫ Was it illegal eavesdropping?
⚫ Was it tortious?
⚫ Was it a disciplinary violation?
⚫ Duty of candor?
⚫ Duty to disclose conflicts of interest?
⚫ Duty of loyalty?
⚫ Duty of confidentiality?
⚫ Was it a good idea?

5
0
⚫ Comment 18 - “Reasonableness” judged by “sensitivity of the
information, likelihood of disclosure if additional safeguards are not
employed, the cost of employing additional safeguards and the extent to
which safeguards adversely affect the lawyer's ability to represent clients
(e.g., software that is excessively difficult to use).”

5
1
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MODEL RULE 1.1
⚫ Comment 8 - To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a
lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice,
including the benefits and risks associated with relevant
technology...”

5
2
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MODEL RULE
5.1, 5.2
⚫ Responsibilities of partners, managers, and supervisory lawyers:
➔ Lawyers must take “reasonable efforts” to ensure that the firm
conforms to the Rules of Professional Conduct
➔ Lawyers supervising other attorneys shall make “reasonable efforts”
to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to the Rules of Professional
Conduct

5
3
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MODEL RULE 5.3
⚫ Responsibilities regarding nonlaywer assistance:
➔ Lawyers with direct supervisory authority over nonlawyers must make
“reasonable efforts” to ensure that the person's conduct is compatible with
the professional obligations of the lawyer
➔ Comment 2 - “A lawyer must give such assistant appropriate instruction
and supervision concerning the ethical aspects of their employment,
particularly regarding the obligation not to disclose information relating to
the representation of the client, and should be responsible for their work
product.”
✓ This means no using unsecured wifi for client matters!

5
4
ABOUT THE FACULTY
MICHELLE GERSHFELD – MGershfeldlaw@gmail.com
Michelle Gershfeld is a bankruptcy attorney, debt negotiator and personal financial life
coach who advises people who are in debt, or building wealth, by identifying and
overcoming obstacles that lie in their path to securing worry-free, financial wellness.
She works with clients individually to create a strategic, customized plan for each
unique financial situation; tackling challenges while defining actionable steps that will
increase awareness, change behaviors and lead to the fulfillment of long-term financial
goals.

5
5
ABOUT THE FACULTY
MICHAEL KASEN – mkasen@kasenlaw.com
Michael Kasen has been an Associate with Kasen & Kasen since 2013. Prior to joining Kasen & Kasen, he
worked as an associate for Frank White-Boyd, P.A. in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida where he assisted in the
representation of individual and business debtors in Chapter 7, 11, and 13 bankruptcy proceedings, as well as
assisting in asset protection planning for high net worth individuals. Mr. Kasen has been involved in the
reorganization of a myriad of businesses including health care businesses, real estate business, manufacturing
business and hospitality businesses, as well as representing high profile individual debtors.
Mr. Kasen currently serves on the Board of Directors for McCurdy Center GP, Inc., a company involved in the
development and operation of not for profit low income independent and assisted living facilities throughout
the state of Florida.
Prior to beginning his career in the law, Mr. Kasen attended Rutgers University, where he earned his
undergraduate degree in Economics in 2005. Mr. Kasen was a member of Omicron Delta Epsilon, an
International Economics Honor Society. He then attended Rutgers University School of Law where he
graduated with a juris doctorate degree in 2008. While in law school Mr. Kasen participated in moot court and
the bankruptcy pro-bono program.

5
6
ABOUT THE FACULTY
BERNIE BURK – bernie.burk@bernieburk.com
Professor Bernard Burk previously taught at the University of North Carolina
School of Law. He is currently on sabbatical.

5
7
GEORGE KUNEY – gkuney@utk.edu
Prior to joining the faculty in 2000, Professor Kuney was a partner in the San Diego office of Allen Matkins
Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP where he concentrated his practice on insolvency and reorganization matters
nationwide. Before that he received his legal training with the Howard, Rice and Morrison & Foerster firms in
his hometown of San Francisco, California. He holds an AV Peer Rating, Martindale-Hubbell’s highest peer
rating for ethical standards and legal ability and is admitted to practice in the state and federal courts of
California and Tennessee and the federal courts of Arizona, and the Supreme Court of the United States of
America.
Kuney’s expertise and scholarly interests relate to business transactions and litigation with an emphasis on
mergers and acquisitions, recapitalizations, and reorganizations. He is the faculty editor and advisor of
Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law and the faculty advisor for the Sports and Entertainment
Society. He consults with law firms and clients nationwide in his areas of expertise in a limited number of
matters annually, generally related to business law, bankruptcy, contracts, legal drafting and writing,
commercial law, chapter 11, and insolvency. He conducts transactional training seminars and clinics for law
students, lawyers, and law firms across the country.

5
8
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
If you have any questions about this webinar that you did not get to ask during
the live premiere, or if you are watching this webinar On Demand, please do
not hesitate to email us at info@financialpoise.com with any questions or
comments you may have. Please include the name of the webinar in your email
and we will do our best to provide a timely response.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The material in this presentation is for general educational purposes only. It has been prepared primarily
for attorneys and accountants for use in the pursuit of their continuing legal education and continuing professional education.

5
9
ABOUT FINANCIAL POISE
DailyDAC LLC, d/b/a Financial Poise™ provides
continuing education to attorneys, accountants,
business owners and executives, and investors. Its
websites, webinars, and books provide Plain
English, entertaining, explanations about legal,
financial, and other subjects of interest to these
audiences.
Visit us at www.financialpoise.com.
Our free weekly newsletter, Financial Poise
Weekly, educates readers about business,
business law, finance, and investing. To receive
it simply add yourself by going to:
https://www.financialpoise.com/newsletter/
Email addresses are never sold to or shared
with third parties.

Hot Off the Press - Recent Cases & Decisions 2019

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Hot Off the Press - Recent Cases & Decisions 2019

More from Financial Poise

Recently uploaded

Hot Off the Press - Recent Cases & Decisions 2019