Minutes

June 19, 2000

In attendance: Mike Blackburn – Co-chair, Val Antczak, Brent Armstrong, Cindy Crass, George Harris, Mark Lehman, & Toby Brown.

I Mike Blackburn asked for comments on the minutes of the June 6, 2000 meeting. Theses minutes were approved.

II Mike recapped the last meeting by noting that we approved recommendations 1 and 2 of the new ABA MDP Commission report, and that numbers 3-5 still needed to be addressed.

Mike read recommendation # 5: “Passive investment in a Multidisciplinary Practice should not be permitted.” He added that he interpreted the meaning of this language to limit ownership in an MDP to an actively employed professional, thus excluding other entities from taking an ownership position.

Val Antczak commented that recommendation numbers 3-5 run counter to recommendations 1 and 2. 3-5 are specific statements that should be left to a rules discussion. Mark Lehman commented that specifics would be better left out at this level. Mike noted that by allowing passive investment, it might be an opportunity to move ahead of the accountants on an MDP issue. Val noted that 5 prejudges proper business structures that may later be determined in a rules discussion. George countered by saying he thought the impact of passive investment rose to this level of recognition. Toby Brown noted that passive investment is designed to positively impact circumstances for clients by its nature. Discussion followed on deferring 3-5 into a rules dialogue.

Mike made a motion to take no opinion on #5 at this point. Passed.

Mike read recommendation # 4: “The prohibition on nonlawyers delivering legal services and the obligations of all lawyers to observe the rules of professional conduct should not be altered.”

Discussion followed on clarifying that the rules may change. Mike proposed adding language that says, “As amended from time-to-time.” Motioned for amendment and recommendation were approved.

Mike read recommendation #3: “Regulatory authorities should enforce existing rules and adopt such additional enforcement procedures as are needed to implement these principles and to protect the public interest.”

Discussion followed on how #3 is somewhat obvious. George motioned to strike #3. Approved.

Mike asked whether the old ABA recommendations should be considered further given the new report. It was agreed to no longer review and approve any recommendations from the original ABA MDP report.

III Rules Review.

Based on Assignments from the last meeting, Mike lead discussions on reviews of current ethics rules and possible changes to them.

George Harris presented on rules 1.10 & 1.7 on conflicts. He noted that for an MDP, conflicts should be imputed to nonlawyer professional services clients. This would extend legal conflicts restrictions to all professionals in an MDP. A discussion on current conflicts issues and the impact pf MDPs followed. George mentioned the “Ethics 2000” ABA model coming out soon. It suggests a ‘screen’ approach, whereby conflicts can be avoided by implementing screens between different practice groups within a firm. This screen concept might also work in MDPs.

Mike noted that clients might not want their information kept confidential from other professionals in an MDP. Val added that clients will go to MDPs because the information is shared.

Mike suggested that George might bring the Ethics 2000 language to a future meeting for discussion.

IV Future Meetings.

Future meeting dates were set (but later changed).

V Meeting concluded at 9:00 a.m.

The Next Meeting is set for:

July 20, 2000, 7:30 to 9:00 a.m.

Utah Law & Justice Center

Last Update: 09/04/02