providing lawyers’
professional liability
insurance since 1979.

Resource Articles

Below are articles, presentations and other resources that we have found to be incredibly helpful for our policyholders. Please note, if you are a current policyholder, please login to view the entire article. If you are not a current policyholder, you can view a short excerpt or description but will not be able to view the full resource. View all resource articles.

Viewing Category: Articles


Article Resource  |  Posted on June 23, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

The Board of Professional Conduct issued five new opinions in 2017 to date. (See MalpracticeAlert! Jan-Mar 2017 for discussion of Opinion 2017-1 and Opinion 2017-2).

Opinion 2017-3 Solicitation of ProfessionalEmployment Via Email, issued April 7, 2017, updates and withdraws former Opinion 2004-1. Opinion 2017-3 notes that because email solicitation is treated similarly to other forms of written communication permitted by Rules 7.1-7.3    of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, the content of the email soliciting professional employment must not be false, misleading, or nonverifiable.

Pursuant to Rule 7.3(b), solicitation in any form is not permitted if:

*  the person being solicited has made it known they do not desire to be contacted;

*  the solicitation involves coercion, duress, or harassment, or the lawyer knows or reasonably should know the person is a minor, incompetent, or cannot exercise reasonable judgment in employing a lawyer.

Rule 7.3 requires that every written, recorded or electronic communication from a lawyer soliciting professional employment comply with three conditions:

*  disclose accurately and fully the manner in which the lawyer became aware of the identity and specific legal need of the addressee;

*  refrain from expressing any predetermined evaluation of the merits of the addressee’s case;

*  conspicuously include the recital “ADVERTISING MATERIAL” or “ADVERTISEMENT ONLY” at the beginning and ending of any electronic communication.

The opinion notes that including “ADVERTISING MATERIAL” or “ADVERTISEMENT ONLY” in the subject line of the email satisfies the requirement to include that recital at the beginning of the communication.

The opinion states that restrictions about the inclusion of the “Understanding Your Rights” must be observed and that the statement must be included in the body of the email solicitation and not referenced by an attachment or hyperlink.

Opinion 2017-3 also indicated that a lawyer may permit a lawyer referral service or lawyer advertising service to transmit a solicitation email on the lawyer’s behalf.  Under Rule 5.3, the lawyer using such a service is responsible for ensuring the service’s compliance with the Rules of Professional Conduct and should review the content of the email to be sure it conforms to the Rules.

Opinion 2017-4 Legal Representation of a Clientby Former Magistrate states that under the Ohio Ethics Law, Ohio Revised Code 102.03(A)(1), a former magistrate is prohibited for 12 months after leaving the bench from representing a client in a matter in which he or she personally participated in as a government employee.

The opinion discusses Rule 1.12:  Former Judge, Arbitrator, Mediator, or Other Third-Party Neutral, of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, which provides:

(a) Except as stated in division (d), a lawyer shall not represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a judge or other adjudicative officer or law clerk to such a person or as an arbitrator, mediator, or other third-party neutral, unless all parties to the proceeding give informed consent, confirmed in writing. (Emphasis added.)

The opinion further notes that, paragraph (c) of Rule 1.12 requires:

(c)    If a lawyer is disqualified by division (a), no lawyer in a firm with which that lawyer is associated may knowingly undertake or continue representation in the matter unless both of the following apply:

(1)   the disqualified lawyer is timely screened from any participation in the matter and is apportioned no part of the fee therefrom;

(2)   written notice is promptly given to the parties and any appropriate tribunal to enable them to ascertain compliance with the provisions of this rule.

Opinion 2017-3 and 2017-4 were also brought to you in the OBLICAlert, May 9, 2017.

On June 22, 2017, Court News Ohio gave notification of the most recent opinion, Opinion2017-5 Virtual Law Office. This opinion states that an Ohio lawyer may provide legal services via a virtual law office, VLO, through the use of available technology, noting that a VLO permits lawyers to work remotely, offers clients and lawyers the ability to discuss matters electronically without meeting in person, affords clients the opportunity to review their client file online, and reduces or eliminates the overhead typically associated with traditional offices.

Citing Rule 1.1 of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, the opinion says that because of the nature of a VLO, the lawyer needs to keep abreast of the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology and possess a general knowledge of the security safeguards for the technology used in the lawyer’s practice.

Further, the lawyer must take steps to ensure that all electronic communications are adequately understood by the client so the client is able to make informed decisions regarding the representation, per Rule 1.4.

When using cloud computing, email, or other technology that relies on third-party storage or transmission of data, the lawyer must take “reasonable efforts” to prevent inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of unauthorized access to information related to the representation of the client, as required by Rule 1.6. The opinion also discussed Rule 5.3 duties related to third- party technology vendors.

Importantly, the opinion indicated that a lawyer may use a shared office arrangement as part of a VLO if:

*  the lawyer meets the “Office address” requirement of Rule 7.2(c) by providing an office address in all communications that corresponds to the lawyer’s home or physical office, the address of the shared office space, or a registered post office box;

*  avoids making a false, misleading, or nonverifiable communication under Rule 7.1

*  may comply with rules 7.1 and 7.2, by stating the lawyer is able to meet in person with clients “by appointment only” or that the lawyer operates a virtual office and can arrange to meet with clients through available technology or in person at the client’s request;

*  ensures that client confidentiality is maintained at all times and that all information related to representation is protected from inadvertent disclosure to third parties, per Rule 1.6 (c).

  • PRACTICE POINTER: These new opinions point out the continuing involvement of technology in the practice of law and the need for lawyers to be aware of the risks and benefits of technology for their practice.

Know that your OBLIC policy provides data breach coverage and use available resources in the “Cyber Toolbox” on the OBLIC website to assess the risks for your firm.

The other trend, as exemplified by Opinion 2017-4, is the challenge presented by conflicts of interest. As lawyers make lateral moves between firms or go from private practice to government or encounter conflicts within their firm involving various client situations, conflicts of interest arise. If you have any questions about a potential conflict of interest, please call the OBLIC Hotline to discuss your inquiry.

Conflicts of interest are better addressed sooner than later!

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on May 22, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

Another practice challenge is presented by a request to serve as outside counsel. For example, you are contacted by a new client, a bank or sizable business, and they send you a long and detailed agreement that defines every aspect of your representation, from your hourly rates and staffing, to limiting your firm’s  recourse.

The mega-law firms have general counsel whose job it is to review and negotiate these agreements. As a solo or small firm that simply does not have the resources to hire a full time person to review these extensive agreements, you must at least watch for a couple clauses.

*  Keep an eye out for agreements and obligations that either limit the insurer’s right of subrogation or expand the liability of the insured;

*  Agreements to indemnify the client, regardless of negligence, for acts arising out of the representation are becoming increasingly common.

(See Sephora USA, Inc. v. Palmer, Reifler &Associates, PA) Nearly all LPL policies exclude coverage for agreements and obligations entered into by the insured without the consent of the insurer.

Before committing to obligations imposed by a new, and hopefully lucrative, client, review the agreements in detail. Contact your insurer if an indemnification clause or other similar expansion or reduction of duties is present. After all, it is  not in your or your client’s interest to lose your insurance coverage when it may be avoidable at the outset of the representation.

Editor’s Note: Thanks to OBLIC Claims Counsel Carl Marsh for this article on Outside Counsel Agreements.

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on May 22, 2017 in: Articles

OBLIC provides answers to your ethics and practice questions from the Director of Loss Prevention in response to Hotline Calls or in- person questions at CLE seminars. This column will feature Q & A’s from those sources of general interest to OBLIC policyholders.

Question: I received a request by email from a third party entity that uses a nationwide network of attorneys to serve as local counsel to other attorneys, law firms and legal departments of companies, asking me to appear at a hearing scheduled soon in the local court in the county seat where I practice.  Can I do this?

Answer: While an attorney can limit the scope  of representation under Rule 1.2 of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, that requires communication with the client, not a third party provider. There may also be issues of sharing fees with non-lawyers and the professional independence of a lawyer, pursuant to Rule 5.4, as well as issues of client confidentiality under Rule 1.6 and potential conflicts of interest under Rule 1.7 and other applicable ethics rules. A lawyer considering undertaking this type of representation should carefully consider the ethical issues involved. If you have questions, please contact OBLIC.


Question: Can an IOLTA account be used for deposits when administering small estates?

Answer: Comment [1] to Rule 1.15 says, “A lawyer should maintain separate trust accounts when administering estate moneys.” The Best Practice is to set up a separate trust account  for the estate. This guards the confidentiality of the clients.  See also Ohio Revised Code 2109.41.   It is recommended that the attorney consult with the Probate Court to determine the Court’s position on this issue.


Question: Can a lawyer be listed with the Better Business Bureau?

Answer: Opinion 87-027 issued by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, the former name for the Board of Professional Conduct, indicates that a lawyer may become a member of the Better Business Bureau provided the BBB continues its practice of forwarding inquiries and complaints regarding lawyers to a local bar association. While this opinion was issued under the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility, superseded by the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, on February 1, 2007, a recent check with the Board of Professional Conduct confirmed that the advice in this opinion is still good.

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on May 22, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

It seems that every recent Malpractice Alert! OBLIC has published warns of a new scam that poses a cyber security threat. That’s because every day DOES bring a new wrinkle to the cyber security page. Recent OBLICAlerts have warned of RansomWare ThreatsWire FraudSchemes and again, Fraudulent Wiring Instructions. These are very real threats! If you have any questions about any potential cyber threat, please call OBLIC!  We’re here to help!


Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on April 7, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

Internet scams continue to target Ohio attorneys.  Recent scams involve the use of relatable data in phishing scams.  This involves scammers obtaining information publicly available on the internet to include in emails so that you see something familiar in the email that will get you to click on the link in the email.  When you click on it, the scammer can plant malware or a virus.

Another recent scam used an email account set up using Office 365.  The email address generated through Office 365 lent the appearance of legitimacy to the email of the scammer, who sought to snare an attorney into a check collection scheme.

Reports about an online scam or email hoax may be made by filing a complaint with the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center or by using the FBI online Tips and Public Leads form.

Here are practice tips to avoid scams:

  • Use automatic updates to be sure anti-virus, firewalls, and known security issues  are always up-to-date
  • Get a VPN or use a personal hotspot rather than public WiFi
  • Implement a policy for all electronic devices – and follow it!
  • Use complex passwords for all devices, including your phone, laptop and tablet – and keep them refreshed
  • Encrypt all electronic communications
  • Train staff and attorneys to spot and avoid common pitfalls

If you have ANY questions about potential scams, please contact OBLIC immediately.

Click here to access the entire Malpractice Alert Jan-Mar 2017

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on April 7, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

Answering the OBLIC Hotline, there are frequent questions involving IOLTA (Interest on Lawyer Trust Account) accounts.  Several practice pointers can help avoid problems with your IOLTA account:

  • Follow the requirements of Rule 1.15 of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct.
  • Never let your balance go negative.
    • This may mean you will need to deposit funds sufficient to cover routine bank service fees to prevent a negative balance.
  • Perform and maintain a monthly reconciliation, per Rule 1.15.
  • Be aware when accepting credit card payments.  See Opinion 2007-3
  • Deposit flat fees appropriately.  See Opinion 2016-1
  • Be sure that funds are actually available for withdrawal after depositing a check from a third party before writing disbursement check from your IOLTA account.  See Opinion 2016-7
  • If you receive a Letter of Inquiry, contact OBLIC immediately!

A recent disciplinary decision highlighted the importance of following good trust account procedures.  See Disciplinary Counsel v. BarberaSlip Opinion No. 2017-Ohio-882.

The Ohio Legal Assistance Foundation provides information and resources on IOLTA & IOTA accounts.  They are also happy to take your telephone inquiries at 614-715-8560.  Your OBLIC Hotline is also always available to help!

Click here to access the entire Malpractice Alert Jan-Mar 2017

Read or view more...

Claims Summary of Hot AOP’s

Article Resource  |  Posted on April 7, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

AOP refers to “areas of practice” that attorneys engage in.  A summary of claims reported to OBLIC over the last year shows several practice areas in which claims commonly occur.

In 2016, OBLIC insureds reported more claims in the areas of real estate and probate, estate planning and trusts than any other area of practice.

Part of the reason for the number of claims in real estate and probate is the complexity of the cases in the practice areas. Another reason may be the larger amount of legal work in these practice areas due to population demographics, with baby boomers now transferring an unprecedented amount of assets.

To help prevent claims, follow these Loss Prevention Tips:

  • Practice good client selection
  • Effectively use engagement and disengagement letters
  • Carefully define the scope of representation
  • Use timely, effective client communication
  • Always address conflicts of interest
  • Keep up with practice developments

If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact Gretchen Mote, Director of Loss Prevention.

Click here to access the entire Malpractice Alert Jan-Mar 2017

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on April 7, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

On February 10, 2017, the Board of Professional Conduct issued two opinions:  Opinion 2017-1 Advertisement of Contingent Fee Arrangements and Opinion 2017-2 Duty of Judge to Report Misconduct.

Opinion 2017-1 advises that a lawyer who advertises litigation services on a contingent fee basis may not use statements such as:

  • “There’s no charge unless we win your case”
  • “No fee without recovery”
  • “You pay no fee unless you win”
  • “You pay us only when we win”

if the lawyer intends to recover advanced litigation costs and expenses from the client, regardless of the outcome of the litigation.

The Opinion says that because of the potential to mislead prospective clients, any obligation of a client to repay litigation costs and expenses must be revealed by the lawyer when advertising the services on a contingent fee basis.  If a lawyer intends to recover advanced costs and expenses of litigation from the client, the advertising must include a statement such as “contingent fee clients are responsible for the costs and expenses of litigation.”

Opinion 2017-2 withdraws Opinion 89-32 and  provides that a judge who has knowledge that another judge has committed a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct that raises a question about the judge’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a judge is required to report it to the appropriate disciplinary authority.  A judge who has knowledge of a lawyer’s violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct has an ethical duty to report it to the disciplinary counsel or local grievance committee.

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on April 7, 2017 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

Am. Sub. H.B. 432, as adopted by the 131st Ohio General Assembly, takes effect on April 6, 2017.  This legislation enacts the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADA), Ch 2137 Ohio Revised Code, to provide for continued access or control over digital assets when the owner of those assets dies or becomes incapacitated.  The legislation tracks the RUFADA model act adopted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.

The Act defines a”digital asset” as an electronic record in which an individual has a right or interest. “Digital assets” may include email accounts, websites or social media accounts such as Facebook, Snapchat or Instagram.

The act provides user direction for disclosure of digital assets, the framework for disclosure of digital assets and creates an order of priority if the owner of digital assets provided conflicting directions or no directions regarding the digital assets.

The legislation also enacts changes to the Uniform Power of Attorney Act regarding digital assets in 1337.571 of the Ohio Revised Code and to the Statutory Forms in 1337.60 ORC.

Adoption of the Ohio Access to Digital Assets Act is an important development for attorneys drafting estate planning documents.  It is a good idea to review this with clients to assist them in making appropriate plans or revisions to existing documents.

This legislation also enacts several other important changes to the law governing decedents’ estates Ohio:

              o   Person deemed to have predeceased another person
              o   Person deemed to have predeceased specified event
              o   Co-owners with right of survivorship
              o   Determination and evidence of death
              o   See also 2105.14 ORC revised effective March 14, 2017

Click here to read the Final Analysis of the bill by the Ohio Legislative Service Commission.

Click here to access the entire Malpractice Alert Jan-Mar 2017



Read or view more...

OSBAIA – Threats to your business come in all forms. Protect yourself like you protect your clients.

Article Resource  |  Posted on July 25, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

Keep yourself protected no matter what kind of unforeseen incidents might arise. The Ohio State Bar Association Insurance Agency Business Owners Policy covers losses due to weather damage, computer crashes and failures, and auto accidents. With this kind of peace of mind you can focus on what’s important, protecting your clients while the Ohio State Bar Association Insurance Agency protects you.

CLICK HERE to get started!


Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on July 12, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

Email scams take many forms, and attorneys are among those that are often targeted with ever-evolving, sometimes complicated schemes.  Face it, hackers view law firms as easy prey.  “Phishing” schemes using data mined from public information to gain access to computer systems are on the rise, appearing as what might seem to be a legitimate email from a recognized organization.   For more information on how to avoid falling victim to a phishing attack, read this great article in Digital Guardian:

OBLIC provides cyber liability coverage as part of your lawyers professional liability policy.  Click here to read a summary of the coverage.  If your system is hacked, please contact OBLIC immediately!

OBLIC also has resources to help you avoid a cyber data breach.  Click here to access the Data Breach/Cyber Risk Management information, if you are a registered policyholder.

If reading the above article scared you a little (it should), and you believe you might want MORE or BROADER cyber coverage than OBLIC already provides, we sell additional cyber coverage to meet those needs.  Just call us!

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention


Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on June 28, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

The Ohio Supreme Court has adopted amendments to the Standard Probate Forms in the Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio, effective July 1, 2016.

The new probate forms will:

  • Form 21.6 permit a person applying for a name change to waive the public announcement requirement where such publication will jeopardize the applicant’s personal safety.
  • Forms 26.0 – 26.14 facilitate the involuntary treatment of alcohol and drug abusers.

Click here to read Probate Forms 21.6 and 26.0 – 26.14

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention

Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Company

Read or view more...

New Advisory Opinions Address Online Lawyer Referral Service and Conflicts for Legal Interns

Article Resource  |  Posted on June 21, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

The Board of Professional Conduct of the Ohio Supreme Court recently issued two new advisory opinions.  Advisory Opinion 2016-3 Lawyer Participation in Referral Services gives guidance for lawyers using online lawyer referral services. Click here to read Opinion 2016-3.

Advisory Opinion 2016-4 Imputation of Conflicts involving Current and Former Legal Interns addresses conflicts of interest arising from a legal intern’s limited representation of clients in a law school legal clinic when the legal intern is simultaneously employed as a law clerk in a law firm.  Click here to read Opinion 2016-4.

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention

Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Company

Read or view more...

New Email Scam Alert!

Article Resource  |  Posted on June 10, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

Various bar associations around the country have been alerted to an email scam that references in the subject line something similar to “Ethics Complaint” or “Bar Complaint”, or words to that effect.  It may also contain links or a return address referencing “complaints.”

DO NOT click on these links as they appear to be a “spearphishing” attempt to put ransomware on an affected computer. Delete such email immediately.  If you receive such an email and need further assistance, please contact OBLIC.

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention

Read or view more...

Transitioning Your Practice? Looking to Hire an Associate?

Article Resource  |  Posted on June 7, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

The OSBA is rolling out a new Rural Practice Initiative (click to learn more) that provides grants and stipends for the training of new attorneys in rural counties of Ohio.

As a resource for our insureds, in both cities and rural areas, OBLIC is pleased to provide Links for Employers at the Career Services Offices of Ohio Law Schools, (click here).

For additional information on Succession Planning for Ohio Attorneys, (click here).

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention

Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on May 19, 2016 in: ArticlesMalpractice Alerts

We’re pleased to send you the latest issue of MALPRACTICE ALERT!  Pleaseclick here to read this publication.

We hope you’ll enjoy receiving MALPRACTICE ALERT!  in this format.  It allows us to provide links that give you direct access to cases, rules and additional resources with just a click.

You can also sign up each insured lawyer in your firm to receive MALPRACTICE ALERT! directly in each email inbox by clicking here.

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention


Read or view more...

US Supreme Court Decision on AG Special Counsel

Article Resource  |  Posted on May 16, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court found that Special Counsel to the Ohio Attorney General did not violate the FDCPA.  OBLIC is proud to have assisted its insured in achieving this landmark decision!

Click here to read more.

Gretchen Koehler Mote
Director of Loss Prevention
Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Company
Phone No.: 614.572.0620






Read or view more...


Article Resource  |  Posted on May 10, 2016 in: ArticlesDo's and Dont'sOBLIC Alerts

Do you practice in an office sharing arrangement?  Does your arrangement comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct?


If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention

Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Company Phone No.: 614.572.0620

Read or view more...

Office Sharing Caveat

Article Resource  |  Posted on April 26, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court M.D. Tenn., highlights the importance of following the Rules of Professional Conduct regarding the name of a lawyer’s practice and the need for clarity in choosing the proper entity through which to practice.  In this case, the office sharing lawyers practiced under a name that listed their last names followed by “an Association of Attorneys.”

This designation would not be permissible pursuant to Comment [2], Rule 7.5 of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct.  Although this decision was revised prior to entry of final judgment, it presents an interesting discussion of vicarious liability issues. Click here to read the decision Wildasin V. Mathes.

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact: Gretchen Koehler Mote, Director of Loss Prevention.

Read or view more...

Advisory Opinion On Lawyer’s Duty To Report Another Lawyer’s Misconduct

Article Resource  |  Posted on April 19, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

The Board of Professional Conduct recently released an advisory opinion about a lawyer’s duty to report unprivileged knowledge of another lawyer’s misconduct.  With the release of Opinion 2016-2, the Board withdrew Advisory Opinion 1990-1.  The Opinion discusses Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct 8.3 and 1.6.  Click here to read Opinion 2016-2.

If you have additional questions on this or any other loss prevention topic, please contact:

Gretchen Koehler Mote
Director of Loss Prevention
Ohio Bar Liability Insurance
Company Phone No.: 614.572.0620

Read or view more...

Punitive Damages Award Can Be Imposed on Estate of Tortfeasor

Article Resource  |  Posted on April 5, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts
In an Opinion written by Chief Justice O’Connor, the Ohio Supreme Court held that where liability has been determined while the tortfeasor was alive,
punitive damages are available to the plaintiff after the tortfeasor’s death and may be imposed against the tortfeasor’s estate.  Click here to read Whetstone v Binner.
Gretchen Koehler Mote
Director of Loss Prevention
Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Company
Phone No.: 614.572.0620

Read or view more...

Ohio Ethics Guide on Client File Retention

Article Resource  |  Posted on March 31, 2016 in: ArticlesOBLIC Alerts

The Board of Professional Conduct of the Ohio Supreme Court issued the Ohio Ethics Guide on Client File Retention on March 18, 2016   To access this Ethics Guide click here

To learn more about Client File Retention, plan to attend the session FuturePlan: Template for Succession Plan on Friday, April 29, 2016 at the All-Ohio Legal Forum. Click here to register


Read or view more...

Connect with Us

Stay up-to-date with all things OBLIC by finding us on social media and subscribing to our Malpractice Alert.

Contact Us

To contact us, call us at (800) 227-4111 or (614) 488-7924 to get additional information or have your questions answered.