Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RRC – Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc. – Revised (6/1/2010) May 21, 2010 KEM E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC: ...................................................................................137 May 23, 2010 Kehr E-mail to KEM, cc RRC: ............................................................................................138 May 23, 2010 KEM E-mail to Kehr, cc RRC: ............................................................................................138 May 23, 2010 Sondheim E-mail to KEM, cc RRC: ...................................................................................139 May 23, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC: .............................................................................140 May 24, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC:..........................................................................141 May 25, 2010 Sondheim E-mail to KEM, cc RRC: ...................................................................................141 May 25, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC: .............................................................................142 May 25, 2010 Melchior E-mail to RRC:.....................................................................................................142 May 25, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC: .............................................................................142 May 25, 2010 Sondheim e-mail to Martinez, cc RRC:..............................................................................142 May 25, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to Drafters, cc RRC: .............................................................................143 May 25, 2010 Tuft E-mail to RRC: ............................................................................................................143 May 25, 2010 Sondheim E-mail to Difuntorum, cc RRC:..........................................................................143 May 26, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC:..........................................................................144 May 26, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to RRC:.................................................................................................144 May 26, 2010 KEM E-mail to RRC: ..........................................................................................................145 May 26, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to KEM, cc RRC: ..................................................................................146 May 27, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to KEM, cc RRC: ..................................................................................149 May 28, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC:..........................................................................150 May 29, 2010 Sondheim E-mail to Difuntorum, cc RRC:..........................................................................150 May 31, 2010 Sondheim E-mail to RRC:..................................................................................................150 May 31, 2010 Martinez E-mail to RRC: ....................................................................................................151 May 31, 2010 Kehr E-mail to RRC:...........................................................................................................151 May 31, 2010 Tuft E-mail to RRC: ............................................................................................................153 June 1, 2010 Melchior E-mail to RRC List:...............................................................................................154 June 1, 2010 William Balin E-mail to RRC List:........................................................................................156 June 1, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to Sondheim, cc RRC:...........................................................................157 June 1, 2010 Tuft E-mail to Difuntorum, cc RRC:.....................................................................................158 June 1, 2010 Difuntorum E-mail to Tuft, cc RRC:.....................................................................................158 June 1, 2010 Julien E-mail to RRC:..........................................................................................................159 June 1, 2010 Julien E-mail to RRC:..........................................................................................................159 June 2, 2010 Sapiro E-mail to RRC List: ..................................................................................................159 RRC - 4-200 [1-5] - E-mails, etc. - REV (06-01-10).doc -vi- Printed: June 2, 2010
RRC – Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc. – Revised (6/1/2010) May 5, 2010 McCurdy E-mail to Drafters (Vapnek & Ruvolo), cc RRC: Rule 1.5 Codrafters (VAPNEK, Ruvolo): The public comments received to date on this rule are attached in a combined PDF. I’ve also provided a Word copy of the draft public commenter chart with the comment synopses filled in. To keep pace with the comments being received, please consider beginning to add the RRC responses, and if desired, modifications to the synopses. Of course, more comments continue to be received each day, and we will convey updated information periodically in order to keep abreast of the public comment review in anticipation of the work being carried out at your June 4 & 5, and June 25 & 26 meetings. Attached: RRC - 4-200 [1-5] - Public Comment Chart - By Commenter - XDFT1 (4-22-10).doc RRC - 4-200 [1-5] - Public Comment Complete - REV (05-05-10).pdf May 14, 2010 McCurdy E-mail to Drafters, cc RRC: Rule 1.5 Codrafters (VAPNEK, Ruvolo): Three additional public comments have been received for this rule, bringing the total comments to 15. I’ve attached an updated comment compilation which is current. An updated public commenter chart, but the SDCBA comment has not yet been added to the public commenter chart. Here are the instructions from the assignment agenda for all post public comment rules: INSTRUCTIONS: For each rule listed below that has received three or more comments/testimony, the codrafters are assigned to review the comments/testimony received and to prepare a revised draft rule, if any revisions are recommended, and a Public Commenter Chart with RRC responses, for submission to staff by 12 noon on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 to distribute with the June 4 & 5 meeting agenda materials. An updated Dashboard, Introduction, and Model Rule comparison chart are also needed to complete the rule; however, the codrafters have the discretion of waiting until the end of the public comment period (on June 15th) to begin work on these documents. Additional comments will be sent to each drafting team by e-mail as they are received. Where three or more comments have been received, materials are enclosed for codrafters. Rules that have received less than three comments/testimony will not be considered until the June 25 & 26 meeting. Attached: RRC - 4-200 [1-5] - Public Comment Chart - By Commenter - XDFT1.1 (05-14-10).doc RRC - 4-200 [1-5] - Public Comment Complete - REV (05-14-10).pdf May 19, 2010 McCurdy E-mail to Drafters, cc RRC: Two additional comments have been received for this rule since my last message, bringing the total number of comments to 17. Here’s an updated comment compilation and an updated public commenter chart. RRC - 4-200 [1-5] - E-mails, etc. - REV (06-01-10).doc -124- Printed: June 2, 2010
Page 1 and 2:
No. Commenter Position 1 Comment on
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
No. Commenter Position 1 10 Crimina
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
RRC - Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
ARBITRATION ADVISORY 01-02 RRC - Ru
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
http://community.lawyers.com/forums
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
May 25, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Son
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53:
Rule 1.5 - Public Comment - File Li
Page 67 and 68:
101
Page 69 and 70:
103
Page 71 and 72:
105
Page 73 and 74:
107
Page 75 and 76:
109
Page 77 and 78:
111
Page 79 and 80:
113
Page 81 and 82:
115
Page 83 and 84:
117
Page 85 and 86:
STROOCK April 2, 2010 Michael F. Pe
Page 87 and 88:
MORTIMER L. LASKI' KENNETH G. GORDO
Page 89 and 90:
Mr. Howard Miller April 8 , 2010 Pa
Page 91 and 92:
125
Page 93 and 94:
127
Page 95 and 96:
129
Page 97 and 98:
131
Page 99 and 100:
unaware 2 of this new rule or that
Page 101 and 102:
BARRY TARLow. BLAIR BERK MARK O. HE
Page 103 and 104:
4, The Proposal a. Comment b. 5. Th
Page 105 and 106:
arrangement, has always been subjec
Page 107 and 108:
(7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Par
Page 109 and 110:
edefines a widely accepted , and in
Page 111 and 112:
alone seek to prohibit , no version
Page 113 and 114:
meeting reflects that there was no
Page 115 and 116:
II. ANAL YSIS OF THE SUBSTANTIVE PR
Page 117 and 118:
Responsibility and Conduct 10 They
Page 119 and 120:
. . " " I suggest we . . . have a c
Page 121 and 122:
agreed hourly or by an whether the
Page 123 and 124:
" " On , Paragraph flat fees" as th
Page 125 and 126:
arrangement with the inclusion of a
Page 127 and 128:
agreement, that result in the refun
Page 129 and 130:
the Commission s proposed paragraph
Page 131 and 132:
true if the fee anything but an abs
Page 133 and 134:
Restraining orders, fee forfeitures
Page 135 and 136:
fee is "the lawyer s property on re
Page 137 and 138:
Under the revised Proposal, the fee
Page 139 and 140:
Similarly, the accepts one case tha
Page 141 and 142:
minimum fee that is a payments or a
Page 143 and 144:
Champion (May 2004); Tarlow Fee For
Page 145 and 146:
July 10, 2007 Memo from the Board o
Page 147 and 148:
the work has been completed and aft
Page 149 and 150:
'-- 183
Page 151 and 152:
BIOGRAPHY Page scholar " the "ultim
Page 153 and 154:
187
Page 157 and 158:
Date: April 22, 2008 MEMORANDUM To:
Page 159 and 160:
193
Page 161 and 162:
195
Page 163 and 164:
197
Page 165 and 166:
199
Page 167 and 168:
201
Page 169 and 170:
the country. The issue is of substa
Page 171 and 172:
□ ABA Model Rule substantially ad
Page 173 and 174:
COMMISSION FOR THE REVISION OF THE
Page 175 and 176:
Nothing in the intervening 75 years
Page 177 and 178:
Should it be Deposited?, 1 Fla. Coa
Page 179 and 180:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees (1) th
Page 181 and 182:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees (b) Th
Page 183 and 184:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees (e) A
Page 185 and 186:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees Commis
Page 187 and 188:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees Commen
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Terms of Payment ABA Model Rule Rul
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
(a) A lawyer shall not make an agre
Page 199 and 200:
Non-refundable Fee [1B] Paragraph (
Page 201 and 202:
[9] Paragraph (e)(2) describes a fe
Page 203 and 204:
(2) a contingent fee for representi
Page 205 and 206: [5] An agreement may not be made wh
Page 207 and 208: (1) a lawyer may charge a true reta
Page 209 and 210: [5] An agreement may not be made wh
Page 211 and 212: This concept comes out of early cas
Page 213 and 214: criminal cases but not in matrimoni
Page 215 and 216: In civil matters, New York lawyers
Page 217 and 218: “obtained in advance of the rende
Page 219 and 220: No. Commenter Position 1 Comment on
Page 221 and 222: No. Commenter Position 1 6 Californ
Page 239 and 240: No. Commenter Position 1 29 Nationa
Page 245 and 246: No. Commenter Position 1 37 Santa C
Page 247 and 248: No. Commenter Position 1 39 State B
Page 255: RRC - Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc
Page 259 and 260: RRC - Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc
Page 263 and 264: ARBITRATION ADVISORY 01-02 RRC - Ru
Page 269 and 270: http://community.lawyers.com/forums
Page 275 and 276: May 25, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Son
Page 293: RRC - Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc
show all

Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?