Become a Fan

twitter / LegalPadblog

LAWJOBS.COM S.F. BAY AREA JOB LISTINGS

« Chamber of Commerce Only Likes Its Own Frivolous Lawsuits | Main | Hooters Hot Pants: Serious Business »

March 17, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341d052253ef01310fb26196970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Eastman Says He's an Assistant AG, So He Must Be.:

Comments

Noah

Is campaigning for the AG's office governed by Rule 1-400? it seems like campaigning for that office is a "message or offer made by or on behalf of a member concerning the availability for professional employment" as the State's attorney general.

If so (and even if not), did Eastman violate Rule 1-400(D)(1) and (2) by being untrue? Answer probably depends on what Jackley's office says.

But, even if he's got some acting AAG role, did he violate 1-400(D)(3) by omitting facts "necessary to make the statements made . . . not misleading" (i.e., by failing to identify the limited nature of his role)?

Even if Rule 1-400 doesn't apply, if Eastman's claim is misleading, isn't it unethical (and perhaps discipline-worthy) conduct in any event?

Noah

Okay, now that I've read the appointment, I would say that his representation is not outright false. But the 1-400(D)(3) question stands. Any takers?

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • lawjobs
    Search For Jobs

    Job Type

    Region

    Keyword (optional)

August 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31