Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Insider Trading & Confidentiality Management – Law Firm Data Privacy & Information Security Management

Law firm ‘wine and dine’ event with client led to insider-trading case against partner’s husband --
  • "The husband of a partner at a well-known law firm is facing an insider-trading case, after allegedly using information he obtained in connection with a planned 'wine and dine' event with a Silicon Valley client… The GC told one Baker partner, who told Baker partner Tonya Jacobs, who told her husband, Balchan, the complaint alleges. Jacobs, who worked at Baker & Hostetler from 1994 to 2012, is not accused of any wrongdoing, nor is the law firm, the Recorder reports."
  • "Such scenarios, partner Raymond Marshall of Bingham McCutchen told the legal publication are 'all too common' and emphasize the need to exercise care about what lawyers discuss in public. 'All firms, including ours, have a very vigorous standard of not discussing client business outside the firm,' said Marshall, who co-chairs his firm's white-collar investigations and enforcement practice group. 'That means no elevator speak. No conversations to be overheard at lunch. No Super Bowl party chat about what you're working on.'"

Illinois Disciplinary Commission Hearing Board reprimands lawyer for e-file confidentiality breach and failing to supervise non-lawyer staff --
  • "In July and August 2011, one the lawyer’s several non-lawyer assistants prepared complaints and corresponding exhibits... The non-lawyer assistant was required to check a box in the CM/ECF system which stated that the filings were in compliance with Rule 5.2(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires that personal identifying information be redacted from all filings."
  • "The box was checked; however, the exhibits included loan documents that had personal identifying information, such as social security number, date of birth, and account numbers. In numerous complaints and exhibits, defendants’ personal identifying information was not redacted; therefore, the confidential information became available to the public and viewable on the court’s website."
  • "The lawyer stipulated that he failed to make reasonable efforts to supervise the non-lawyer and the process of redacting the confidential information."

No comments:

Post a Comment