New York Bar bans lawyers from working in firms owned by non-lawyers

  • Print
  • Comments (6)

Readers' comments (6)

  • So what does this mean for DLA? Will the firm's separate LLPs provide a get-out clause?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Excellent. The whole sell out idea is no good for the profession

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A desperate attempt to keep fees artifically high and maintain super-normal profits.
    It wont work, the tide has turned.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In my view, It is the right decision in the best interests of the public - lawyers are required by international and national law to be independent, amongst other obligations. This is why it will be interesting to see how the new ABS's in England will be able to illustrate their compliance with this requirement. Lack of independence can lead to lack of trust by the client and ultimately by the public.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • But note this comment, from the New York Law Journal:
    The state bar, however, said that a New York-licensed lawyer who principally practices in another jurisdiction, such as the District of Columbia, where non-lawyers can share ownership of law firms —would not face a similar ban.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I wonder how the US (an other) anti-competition frameworks will deal with this blatant closed shop. What happened to the free movement of goods and services in the land of the free?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (6)