Public Hearings on Eligibility for Assignment of Counsel-ILS

In accordance with the settlement agreement between the State of New York and a plaintiff class represented by the New York Civil Liberties Union in Hurrell-Harrina et at. v. State of New York and approved by the Albany County Supreme Court, the Office of Indigent Legal Services (ILS) is charged with developing and issuing criteria and procedures to guide courts in counties located outside of New York City in determining whether a person is unable to afford counsel and eligible for mandated representation.

In furtherance of this responsibility, ILS will conduct a series of public hearings in each of the nine (9) judicial districts outside of New York City to solicit the views of county officials, judges, institutional providers of representation, assigned counsel, current and former indigent legal services clients and other individuals, programs, organizations and stakeholders interested in assisting ILS in establishing criteria and procedures to guide courts when determining eligibility for mandated legal representation in criminal and family court proceedings.  The first of these hearings will be in Syracuse, New York on July 9.

For more information, and instructions for providing written or oral testimony, go to: https://www.ils.ny.gov/files/Eligibility%20Public%20Hearings%20Notice.pdf.  Please feel free to contact me (or any member of the ILS staff) if you have questions about the hearings.

                      Take good care,

Angela Olivia Burton, Esq.

Director of Quality Enhancement, Parent Representation

New York State Office of Indigent Legal Services

80 South Swan Street, 29th Floor

Albany, New York 12210

Desk:  518-474-4859

Cell:  518-491-0094

Fax:  518-474-0505

http://www.ils.ny.gov

Marijuana businesses need lawyers, but how do you build that practice? (podcast with transcript)

BY STEPHANIE FRANCIS WARD

In this month’s “Asked and Answered”, Seattle lawyer Ryan Espegard chats with the ABA Journal‘s Stephanie Francis Ward about how he advises the marijuana industry–being mindful of state and federal regulation–and what sorts of business development activities have worked for him.

Access this podcast and a full transcript here.

Related articles

New York State-Federal Judicial Council and the Second Circuit Judicial Council Are Pleased to Present a Complimentary CLE Program

Presentations will address ethical and substantive standards for the application of attorney-client privilege and work product protection in civil and criminal litigation, in the corporate context, with respect to employees and former employees, joint defense agreements, and the witness/advocate rule. The Panels will address the practical application of those standards in state and federal court litigation, rules addressing inadvertent production and waiver, privilege logs, claw-back agreements, assertions of privilege/work product during depositions, common waiver scenarios, in camera review and dispute resolution issues. Courses will earn three New York State CLE Credits (1.5 Hours Ethics and 1.5 Hours Practice Credits). 

Both Programs will also be available via webcast. Please register for the Programs at http://ww2.ca2.uscourts.gov/cle 

Dates/Venues: 

****Northern District of New York: Thursday, June 4, 2:00 PM – 5:00 PM 

James M. Hanley Federal Building, Jury Assembly Room, 100 S. Clinton St., Syracuse, NY 13261 

R.S.V.P. by May 29, 2015 for Northern District of New York Program 

****Eastern District of New York: Thursday, June 18, 5:00 PM – 8:00 PM 

Theodore Roosevelt U.S. Courthouse, Ceremonial Courtroom, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, NY 11201 

R.S.V.P. by June 12, 2015 for Eastern District of New York Program 

Please see the revised information available here: http://www.nynd.uscourts.gov/sites/nynd/files/pdf_cle.pdf

Benitez v United Home of N.Y. LLC

2015_30794 by Leonard E Sienko Jr

Decision of Interest – Professional Responsibility – Bank awarded summary judgment on liability against closing attorneys who failed to disclose subject premises did not have certificate of occupancy

U S v Skelos 15 Mag 1492 (Filed)

Dropbox is Not “Insecure”–Lawyerist.com

by Sam Glover on April 9th, 2015

***

“…Asking whether Dropbox is secure or not is asking the wrong question. What you need to figure out is (1) what security measures does Dropbox take, and (2) are you and your clients comfortable with those security measures. Most lawyers aren’t sufficiently technologically competent to accurately assess the first question, much less decide the second — and that is a problem. But maybe I can help a bit with that…”

Read entire article here.

Related articles

New York County Issues Ethics Opinion Clarifying Rules on Lawyers’ Use of LinkedIn – Legal Ease Blog

Publications1748_0

Last week, the New York County Lawyers Association Professional Ethics Committee released Formal Opinion 748, addressing the ethical implications of lawyers’ use of LinkedIn.

Read more:  http://legalease.blogs.com/legal_ease_blog/2015/03/new-york-county-issues-ethics-opinion-clarifying-rules-on-lawyers-use-of-linkedin.html#ixzz3WTPhbXEq

Related articles

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,594 other followers

%d bloggers like this: