“KPMG Law Firm Faces California Blockade With Fee Shares Bill” —

• “A California bill aims to throw a wrench into plans by KMPG and law firms backed by outside investors to operate in the state from their perches in Arizona.”
  “The measure (A.B. 931), already passed by the state Assembly, would ban California lawyers and firms from sharing legal fees with ‘out-of-state alternative business structures.’ It was introduced less than two weeks before KPMG won approval to launch a law firm in Arizona under the state’s alternative business structure program, positioning it as the first Big Four accounting, tax, and consulting company to compete head-on with law firms in the US.”
• “KPMG, whose size and reach makes it a competitive threat to Big Law, plans to use staffing agencies and co-counseling relationships with other law firms to serve clients outside of Arizona. The California bill would effectively close off access to the Golden State, an important legal services market.”
• “‘We’ve seen an attempt by some of the ABS’s to come in through the back door over the border to California,’ said Nancy Drabble, CEO of Consumer Attorneys of California. The professional organization for plaintiff’s attorneys is a key backer of the legislation, which Drabble said was designed to prevent large corporations, private equity companies, and hedge funds participating in the Arizona alternative business structure system from entering California through alliances with lawyers in the state.”
• “Litigation funders, private equity, and marketing agencies have flocked to Arizona, which eliminated a rule preventing non-lawyers from owning law firms and created an alternative business structure licensing program. California and other major legal markets have so far declined to enact similar changes, which would open up law firms to direct outside investment and could allow them to go public.”
• “‘There is always a risk that when one state, particularly a big state, passes a law, other states will look at it,’ said Boris Ziser, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel and co-head of the firm’s finance group, who has helped set up around half-a-dozen alternative business structures in Arizona. ‘That’s one of the unfortunate byproducts of a bad law.'”
• “KPMG wants to expand some of the legal work it’s already doing outside of the US, including large scale integrations following mergers and acquisitions by its clients. But that would likely require at least some ability to operate in the country’s largest markets, which are outside of Arizona.”
• “The main focus of the legislation is on regulating consumer legal funding—deals in which funders purchase the right to receive a portion of settlements or awards from individual consumers’ legal claims in the state.”
• “It would regulate consumer legal funding agreements and ban attorneys from accepting clients from referral services that are not certified lawyers. The measure excludes lenders and special purpose entities that invest in a consumer legal funding company.”
• “Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2022 signed a law that blocked the California Bar from tinkering with the rules banning non-lawyer ownership of law firms. The move halted discussions of a possible regulatory ‘sandbox,’ like that in Utah, to experiment with alternative business structures.”

David Kluft notes: “Can I brag about the appeal I won for a current client during a pitch to a new prospective client?”

• “Oregon Ethics Opinion 2024-24 opines that non-confidential client information can be discussed during a client pitch, but lawyers must be mindful that some public information may be confidential as to the lawyer, and that could include relatively innocuous data such as the identity of a client or the existence of a legal dispute even if it’s on the public docket.”
• “Why can such information be confidential? Because even if it is publicly available it still may not be generally known, and it be embarrassing or detrimental to the client depending on the context. If you want to discuss client confidential information during a pitch, the client’s informed consent is required.”
• Read the opinion here.

“Judge allows Dallas defense lawyer to stay on Texas 7 case, despite alleged conflicts” —

• “The attorney representing Randy Halprin will remain on his defense team, despite witnessing the execution of another member of the Texas Seven, a judge ruled Monday. The Dallas County district attorney’s office wanted lawyer Heath Harris kicked off the case, arguing his work as a former prosecutor disqualified him from representing Halprin. But state District Judge Lela Lawrence Mays said there wasn’t proof the purported conflict of interest merited removing Harris.”
• “Harris previously held a high-ranking position in former District Attorney Craig Watkins’ administration. Harris, alongside Watkins, attended the 2012 lethal injection of George Rivas, the man described as masterminding the prison break. In their 60-page motion from March, prosecutors also painted a picture that Harris was involved in the Texas Seven’s post-conviction proceedings.”
• “Harris has said he had no involvement in Halprin’s prosecution decades ago and that he would zealously fight to stay on the case; at a hearing last week, Harris testified in his own defense — and cross-examined himself.”
• “‘I never thought there was a conflict,’ Harris told The Dallas Morning News on Tuesday. ‘I didn’t do any work on the Texas Seven case — I’m trying to work as hard as I can to separate (Halprin) from the actions from the Texas Seven.'”
• “The latest ruling is the finale to a spate of legal challenges over conflicts of interest. Prosecutors first sought to oust Harris and then the DA’s office wanted to recuse itself because a prosecutor worked for a law firm that handled Halprin’s post-conviction defense two decades ago.”
• “Jim Coleman, a professor at Duke University’s law school who runs the Center for Criminal Justice and Professional Responsibility, said a judge should err on the side of not making a mistake that could be appealed: ‘Capital cases are not where you want to be out on the cutting edge of the law, particularly one with a long history where there have been errors.'”
• “‘Why not cure something before it can become an issue?’ he said. ‘Why would you force relationships that might appear questionable?'”
• “Brian Owsley, an associate professor at UNT Dallas College of Law, said the DA’s office appeared to ask to recuse itself in good faith and the judge exercised her discretion. If he’s convicted, Halprin has waived his right to appeal based on the DA’s alleged conflict, according to court records.”
• “People facing death should have lawyers they are confident in, said Bruce Green, a professor and director of the Stein Center for Law and Ethics at Fordham University’s law school.”
• “‘If there’s no objection from the defendant — and they want this lawyer — and the lawyer thinks they can do a good job, then interfering in that relationship is problematic,’ Green said. “