Effective Client Communication Is All About Details and Documentation

By Mark Bassingthwaihte, Esq.

              ABA Model Rule 1.4 Communication seems clear on its face. Attorneys are to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters as well as to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. Attorneys are to also explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit all clients to make informed decisions regarding their representation. Maybe I’m just not seeing it, but all this seems rather straightforward to me. If it were that simple, however, why do attorneys continue to face disciplinary complaints and malpractice claims in the numbers they do for simply failing to communicate? I believe, in part, it’s because many don’t fully understand what the rule is saying.

              I have found it helpful to analyze Rule 1.4 from a slightly different perspective than what’s commonly done, which is to take it at face value and focus on what needs to be communicated and when. We’re often told of the importance of returning phone calls in a timely fashion, forwarding copies of all relevant documents, providing regular and detailed billing, and personally visiting with the client to explain the status of a matter sufficient to allow the client to make informed decisions when deemed necessary. While important, I would like to come at the rule from the perspective of who gets to decide what.

              Beyond what is set forth above, Rule 1.4 also states that an attorney shall inform the client of any decision or circumstance that requires the client’s informed consent under the Rules. This brings Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation and the conflict rules into play. In addition, the Rule 1.4 tells us that an attorney is to reasonably consult with the client about the means by which the client’s objectives are to be accomplished. For me, this language shifts the emphasis of the rule. Rule 1.4 isn’t just about what an attorney thinks a client needs to know. It’s also stating that an attorney is to communicate all that a client reasonably expects to be told throughout the course of representation. There is real value in shifting the focus from what an attorney thinks should be shared and moving it toward what a client would reasonably expect his or her attorney to share. 

              With this in mind, what are the ramifications of Rule 1.4 day to day? Certainly, promptly returning phones calls, timely responding to client requests for information, forwarding copies of documents, and the regular sending of detailed bills are a given. But there is more. An attorney should keep clients informed of all court dates, all filings, and all offers to settle or mediate. Also, don’t overlook telling clients about any changes to your contact information such as a change in your address, phone number, or email. Yes, perhaps a shift in perspective wasn’t necessary to develop this list thus far; but I will share that many attorneys regularly struggle with following through on just these basics.

              Typical rationalizations or excuses include the client doesn’t really need to be bothered with this, I know what my client will say or decide anyway, I don’t have the time to tell them, the client doesn’t want to be billed for the time it will take, etc. In short, attorneys start to run with assumptions and rationalizations when it comes to the basics of effective communication. This can be a dangerous play.

              How could the above list of suggested communication best practices be expanded? Consider scope of representation. An attorney hired to handle litigation for a financial institution will understandably want to focus solely on the litigation. On the other hand, the client who has hired this attorney may be expecting the attorney to see the “big picture” and keep them informed about everything in play, to include issue spotting. What if there is a regulatory reporting and/or compliance issue peripheral to the litigation? If the attorney is not up to handling the related issue, she must say so because the client will often reasonably expect their attorney to not only issue spot, but to take care of the related matter or at least inform them of anything the attorney is not competent to or perhaps prepared to handle so that appropriate attention can be given to that peripheral issue. This is one reason why documenting scope of representation is critically important with all clients. Again, it is all about considering what clients would reasonably expect to be told.

              So, now we can expand our list of ramifications to include the following. Clients should be told what the scope of representation is and also what it isn’t. They should be informed of their rights, especially in criminal matters. The ramifications of any actual or potential conflict issues should be fully explained prior to any client agreeing to representation. Client permission should be sought and obtained for granting extensions of time to adverse parties, stipulating to evidence or testimony, agreeing to continuances, and for making and/or rejecting any and all settlement offers. Clients expect to be told when their matter has concluded and what, if anything, they must yet do. And whether through inability or oversight, clients must also be informed of a failure to act on the client’s matter or that their case has been dismissed. Clients do reasonably expect to be informed about any and all of the above regardless of whether it’s good news or bad.

              This shift in perspective helps keep the emphasis on the expectations of your clients. Remember it is you who is in their employ, and they are the ones who get to make many of the important decisions. This reality does not in any way, shape or form minimize your role as the attorney. In fact, I believe this perspective helps to elevate your role. Consider the word “counselor” in light of Rule 1.4 and ask yourself what might that word mean in daily practice? For me, it means an attorney is to advise the client about the legal and practical aspects of any given matter. She is to identify and evaluate alternative solutions, pointing out the positive and negatives of each. The goal is to enable the client “…to participate intelligently in decisions concerning the objectives of the representation and the means by which they are to be pursued.” (See Comment 5 to Rule 1.4 of the ABA Model Rules.)

              This intended outcome does require you to approach communication from the client’s perspective. What clients expect to be told will vary with every client and every matter. Talk to your clients and try to determine their expectations from the outset. Ask yourself “what does the client need to know to be able to make intelligent decisions.” The bottom line is clients do expect to be fully informed, and attorneys have an ethical obligation to meet that expectation. Here’s the kicker, however. Your communication efforts must be handled in a way that seeks to ensure that the client understands and comprehends all that is being communicated about all that must be decided. Forwarding copies just doesn’t cut it.

              Of course, all of your communication efforts may be for naught if there is no contemporaneously made documentation of what was communicated by both you and your clients. Of particular importance is documenting any and all advice given, coupled with creating a record of the decision-making process. Note what information was shared with you that you based your advice upon and detail why you gave the advice you gave.  Also make sure you document what the client’s reasons were for making any decision made, especially if the decision was not entirely in line with the advice you gave.

              I’ve heard all kinds of excuses for why attorneys fail to follow through with thoroughly documenting all files along these lines.  “It isn’t necessary,” “It takes too much time,” “There are too many other things we have to do,” “The client would be offended if we did that,” and “We’re trying to keep costs down” are commonly shared. Just remember that’s all well and good until someone questions what you did or why you did it. Memories are short, yours included. Never forget the following. If you didn’t document it, it wasn’t said, or it didn’t happen. That’s how it often plays out in the world of discipline and malpractice.

Mark Bassingthwaighte, Esq. Is the resident Risk Manager at ALPS Insurance. To learn more about how ALPS can support your solo or small firm visit: alpsinsurance.com

Public Parking Closure at Scott M. Matheson Courthouse – Updated Implementation Details

PRESS RELEASE

Salt Lake City (Dec. 17, 2025) — The Utah State Courts previously announced the permanent closure of public parking at the Scott M. Matheson Courthouse parking garage, effective January 1, 2026. That closure date remains in effect for the general public.

Update: Public parking in the Matheson parking garage will close on January 1, 2026, as previously announced. However, the implementation date has been extended for court patrons with a valid disability placard or license plate. The closure date for such spaces will be announced at a later time.

Patrons displaying a valid disability placard or license plate may continue to use the parking garage after January 1, 2026. Those patrons should be aware that access will be subject to increased security screening and should plan additional time when traveling to the courthouse.

Court patrons without a valid disability placard or license plate are encouraged to plan ahead by reviewing alternative parking and transportation options when attending proceedings at the Matheson Courthouse.

RELATED: Utah Judiciary Announces Change to Public Parking at the Matheson Courthouse

CONTACT
Tania Mashburn
She/Her/Hers
Director of Communications
801-712-4545
taniam@utcourts.gov

Gov. Cox appoints Joel Ferre to the Third District Court

PRESS RELEASE

SALT LAKE CITY (Dec. 17, 2025) – Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox has appointed Joel Ferre to the
Third District Court, filling the vacancy created by Judge Mark Kouris’s retirement. Judicial
appointments are subject to confirmation by the Utah Senate.

“Joel Ferre has spent decades doing the unglamorous work that keeps the system honest by
following the facts, applying the law, and protecting the public,” Gov. Cox said. “Utah will be
well served by his steady judgment on the Third District Court.”

Ferre has served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Utah since 2018,
leading civil enforcement efforts in cases involving health care fraud, opioid diversion, and
violations of federal statutes protecting public funds and programs. He has represented the
United States in federal district court, handling both affirmative and defensive matters. In
recognition of the Office’s efforts to combat the opioid epidemic, he received the United States
Department of Justice Local Impact Opioid Team Enforcement Award in 2024. He was also
recognized as Civil Division Lawyer of the Year in 2023.

Before joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Ferre served in the Utah Attorney General’s Office,
where he directed the Tort Section and later served as Deputy Director of the Litigation Division.
In that role, he defended the State of Utah and its agencies in litigation involving personal injury,
employment discrimination, and complex business disputes.

“I am sincerely grateful to Governor Cox for this nomination and the opportunity to continue
serving the people of Utah,” Ferre said. “I have dedicated my career to serving the citizens of
Utah, and if fortunate to be confirmed by the Senate, I will continue to serve with integrity,
compassion, and a deep respect for the rule of law.”

Ferre earned his law degree from the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law and a
bachelor’s degree in political science from Weber State University. He is a member of the Utah
State Bar.

###

ROBERT CARROLL | Director of Communications
OFFICE OF GOV. SPENCER J. COX
STATE OF UTAH
801-243-2290

VIDEO: Exploring the GenAI Tools Transforming Legal Workflows

In a new 14-minute video, AI Committee Chair Bennett Borden and Innovation in Law Practice Committee Member Victoria Carrington provide a clear-eyed walkthrough of today’s most practical generative AI tools for legal professionals. Their discussion focuses not on hype, but on how these technologies can responsibly augment legal work while preserving the ethical rigor that defines the profession.

Bennett BordenBorden and Carrington spotlight several widely used platforms, such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Zoom AI Companion, Notebook LM, Notion AI, and others. They talk about each platform offering targeted capabilities that can streamline research, expedite drafting, support matter organization, or clarify complex concepts for clients and colleagues. Whether used to summarize lengthy documents, generate issue-spotting outlines, or organize case-related materials, these systems can help lawyers reclaim valuable time for higher-order analysis and client engagement.

Victoria Carrington

The presenters reiterate an essential principle throughout: no AI tool should ever replace legal judgment. Outputs must be reviewed, verified, and refined by a licensed professional. Copy-and-paste shortcuts, no matter how tempting, risk undermining accuracy, confidentiality, and professional responsibility. AI is an accelerant, not an autopilot.

RELATED: Navigating Generative AI in Law: Five Ethical Principles Every Lawyer Should Remember

For Bar licensees seeking to explore these tools in a structured and reliable way, the video also highlights the LexisAI resource page in the Practice Portal, available at no cost. This curated environment offers guided access to trusted research support, helping practitioners incorporate generative AI into their workflows without compromising quality or compliance. (As a Bar licensee, you also have the benefit of receiving a 15% discount when purchasing LexisAI.)

As Borden and Carrington emphasize, generative AI is not about changing what it means to practice law; it is about changing how legal work gets done. For seasoned attorneys, emerging practitioners, and even clients navigating their own documents, these tools can illuminate pathways through legal complexity — provided they are used thoughtfully, ethically, and always under the steady hand of human expertis14

*AI assisted with the writing of this blog.

Legislative–Judicial Tensions Addressed Head-On in Utah State Bar’s ‘Let’s Talk & Let’s Listen’ Forum

On Wednesday, the Utah State Bar was pleased to host Utah Senate President Stuart J. Adams and Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz in the first of its continuing legal education (CLE) dialogue series, Let’s Talk & Let’s Listen. The two-member panel was moderated by full-service litigator Keith A. Call. More than 700 legal professionals joined the session online, with another 60 individuals, including dignitaries, attending in person for the forum that examined the respective roles of Utah’s three branches of government.

“The timing of this event carried particular significance, considering recent policy disagreements and procedural rifts between the legislature and the judiciary, which have underscored the need for renewed engagement across branches of government,” said Utah State Bar President Kim Cordova. “This CLE was intentionally positioned as an opportunity to model constructive discourse marked by civility, respect, and adherence to the standards of professionalism. By convening legislative leaders and the legal community, the Bar sought to reinforce the shared commitment to safeguarding the constitutional framework and improving interbranch understanding.”

The main discussion began with the moderator highlighting the increasing tension between the legislature and the judiciary. Adams and Schultz both agreed that emotions have reached a “fever pitch” with recent court rulings about abortion, voting, redistricting, and other matters. The legislative leaders were candid about their viewpoints on the balance of power between the branches of government and the responsibilities borne by the courts and attorneys licensed by the Bar in supporting constitutional governance.

The Bar offered one hour of pending e-verified live mandatory CLE credit for its licensees who registered in advance and submitted questions for Adams and Schultz to answer. Those questions and proposed topics, which were synthesized and presented by the moderator, included:

  • What would you like the Utah judiciary to understand about your recent concerns regarding court rulings?
  • What has the Supreme Court and District Court got wrong? 
  • Are threats of violence against judges, legislators, or any public servants appropriate?

Adams and Schultz expressed their passion for their roles as elected officials of their constituents, to act in their best interests and fulfill their constitutional obligations as the “voice of the people” in setting policy. Both men said they take their responsibilities seriously, with Adams emphasizing that he’d do everything within his power to protect our democratic republican form of government. He added that the current divisive issues are not partisan, but Constitutional in regard to checks and balances of the state’s government system.

“Even as today’s discussion highlighted the very real and consequential disagreements between the legislature and the judiciary, I appreciate the willingness of President Adams and Speaker Schultz to engage with Utah lawyers on matters that are both sensitive and currently before the courts,” said moderator Call. “Bringing these conversations into a structured, professional forum reinforces the value of open dialogue and the shared duty to uphold the rule of law.”

Part One of the series concluded with a reaffirmation of the importance of open dialogue among civic institutions and the role of attorneys in fostering informed, principled, and respectful engagement. Participation was made available at no cost through the support of sponsoring law firms Snell & Wilmer and Spencer Fane. Part Two of the CLE series will feature Chief Justice Matthew B. Durrant on March 17th in commemoration of the Bar’s 95th Anniversary.

Disclaimer: CLE credit was only available to registrants who attended the hybrid event on Wednesday, December 10, 2025. It is no longer available.

Join us in engaging with Utah’s lawmakers. They do want to hear from you.

  • Go to the Utah Legislature website (https://le.utah.gov/) and select “Legislators.”
  • Then click on “FindbyAddress/Map” and enter your address to see your Senator and Representative.

Contact Them

  • Each legislator’s page lists their email and phone number.

Additional Contacts

  • Utah Senate: 801-538-1035 | Senate Roster
  • Utah House: 801-538-1029 | House Roster

Utah State Bar Warns Licensees About Phishing Scam Impersonating Its Executive Director

The Utah State Bar is aware of a fraudulent email currently circulating that impersonates our Executive Director, Elizabeth Wright. It uses a deceptive email address — elizabeth.wright@ utahbar.org.sendcrp.com — that is not affiliated with the Bar.

The phishing email:

  • Addresses recipients by name (e.g., “Dear [First Name] [Last Name]”)
  • References “a matter that surfaced earlier this week involving a small number of firms including your firm [Firm Name]”
  • Requests that you reply with your phone number so the sender can “reach you directly”

This message did not come from the Utah State Bar and should be treated as a phishing attempt.

What You Should Do

Please do not reply to the email, and do not provide your phone number or any other personal or firm information. Simply delete the message from your inbox or report it as phishing to your email provider.

For more information about cyberattacks, read the blog from the Bar’s IT Director, Avoid Cyberattacks Over the Holidays in Your Law Practice – Utah State Bar

Avoid Cyberattacks Over the Holidays in Your Law Practice

By Spencer Twede
Utah State Bar IT Director

Spencer Twede

Holiday celebrations with family, friends, and colleagues are upon us, and we’re all thinking about a lot right now. Who can pick me up from the airport? Did I send that donation, or is the envelope still on my desk? What am I going to gift to the neighbors? Will those holiday cards arrive on time if I mail them today?

We’re juggling so much that we can’t possibly pay attention to everything at once. And somehow, in the chaos, we’ve forgotten to order catering for the office party.

Cybercriminals know this all too well. They know we’re distracted, stretched thin, and operating with limited mental bandwidth.

One leading security firm reports a 30% increase in cyberattacks during holiday periods and a 25% increase in phishing attempts year-over-year. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have also warned that ransomware attacks spike during holiday weekends, highlighting an 82% increase in ransomware-related losses across just two recent years.

This all sounds scary, but the good news is that a few simple habits can go a long way toward protecting you, your clients, and your firm. Here are seven easy tips to help you celebrate with a bit more peace of mind:

  1. Power Off Your Computer While You’re Away: Fully shutting down your work computer helps prevent remote access attempts or unauthorized use. An offline system is much
    harder to compromise than one quietly connected to the internet.
  2. Beware of Urgent or Too-Good-To-Be-True Messages: Phishing attempts spike every holiday season. Scammers send fake tracking updates, “special holiday deals,” charity requests,
    or even urgent, spoofed client matters. Slow down before you click. Don’t let a moment of haste ruin your holiday.
  3. Avoid Overly Revealing Out-of-Office Replies: An out-of-office message that announces you’re out of the country or unavailable until a specific date can signal to attackers
    that your attention is elsewhere. Keep it polite, brief, and vague.
  4. Be Cautious on Public Wi-Fi: Travel often means connecting to airport, hotel, or café Wi-Fi. If you must use these networks, avoid accessing sensitive data
    without a VPN, and disable automatic Wi-Fi connections so you remain in full control.
  5. Verify Unusual Client or Coworker Requests: Impersonation is easy and common. Be wary of unusual wire transfers, document access requests, or anything asking for your login credentials. Always verify unexpected requests using a known, separate communication channel.
  6. Think Twice Before Posting Travel Photos: Sharing real-time vacation updates can create both digital and physical security risks. As you leave for the airport, you wouldn’t stop to put a sign in your yard saying you’re on the beach in Hawaii. Treat your social media the same way and save the posts
    for when you get back.
  7. Don’t Leave Work Devices in Your Car: Theft increases significantly during the holiday shopping season. A stolen device isn’t just an inconvenience; it can be a serious data breach. Always bring laptops and tablets inside, even during quick errands.

Nobody wants to return from holiday break to discover their email was phished; client data is being held for ransom, or that a “co-worker” they hurriedly sent a gift card to was actually a scammer overseas.

A little extra care now can save a lot of trouble later. When it comes to cybersecurity during the holidays, a few simple steps really do pay off.

Spencer Twede is the IT Director of the Utah State Bar with a background in psychology and Spanish from Weber State University
and a Master of Science in Information Technology Management from Western Governors University. He has worked in technology
across multiple sectors, including support services for Apple and K-12 public education.

Utah Judiciary Announces Change to Public Parking at the Matheson Courthouse

Salt Lake City, (Nov. 24, 2025) —The Utah State Courts today announced that public parking in the underground garage at the Scott M. Matheson Courthouse will be discontinued effective January 1st, 2026.

This change is part of an ongoing effort to enhance courthouse safety and security while maintaining convenient access for court users, jurors, attorneys, and the public.

“The Matheson Courthouse is one of the busiest judicial facilities in the state,” said Chris Palmer, Director of Security for the Utah State Courts. “This adjustment aligns with national security standards and is a proactive measure to better protect the public and court employees while ensuring continued access through nearby parking options.”

Members of the public visiting the courthouse are encouraged to use public transit, including the TRAX Courthouse Station, which is located directly adjacent to the courthouse, and multiple UTA bus routes that serve the surrounding area. Several public parking facilities within one block of the courthouse are also available, including:

  • 500 South Surface Lot
  • WaFed Building Garage (405 S. Main Street)
  • 175 East 400 South Lot
  • Salt Lake City metered street parking

This decision follows a multi-agency review involving the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office, Utah State Courts Security, and the Administrative Office of the Courts. The review considered operational efficiency, national security guidance, and the availability of alternative parking resources in downtown Salt Lake City.

Parking will continue to be available for jurors. Public communication materials, including signage and advance notifications, will be issued ahead of the transition.

“This is a careful, balanced decision,” Palmer added. “Public access remains a top priority. The goal is to ensure that access occurs in a way that maximizes safety for everyone in the courthouse”.

Updated maps, parking information, and answers to frequently asked questions will be posted at www.utcourts.gov and displayed on-site prior to the effective date.

# # #

VIDEO: Navigating Generative AI in Law: Five Ethical Principles Every Lawyer Should Remember

By Nick Hafen
AI Standing Committee Co-Chair

Guest Blog

We’re still seeing too many headlines about lawyers misusing generative AI. While the core ethical duties of competence, confidentiality, and honesty remain exactly the same, the arrival of AI tools introduces new wrinkles that the profession must understand. Generative AI isn’t going away, and it offers tremendous promise, but only if we use it thoughtfully.

Here are five key considerations for practicing law responsibly in the era of AI.

1. Always Verify the Content

Generative AI isn’t Google, Westlaw, or Lexis. Traditional research tools point you directly to sources; generative AI creates new content based on training data. That can be incredibly useful for brainstorming, drafting, and summarizing, but it can also be completely wrong.

Before relying on any AI-generated legal information, go to the original authority, read it yourself, and exercise your own judgment. Verification isn’t optional.

2. Protect Confidentiality

The duty to protect client information predates AI, but generative tools add an extra layer of complexity. Many AI platforms use user inputs to train future models. That means anything you type could reappear — in whole or in part — later.

Whenever possible, use tools that do not train on your data. If a platform does train on user inputs, treat it as a public forum and never enter confidential or identifiable client information. The risk may be small, but the ethical duty is absolute.

3. Bill Honestly When Using AI

AI can drastically reduce the time required to complete certain tasks. But if you’ve agreed to bill by the hour, you can’t use AI to complete a two-hour assignment in two minutes and still charge for two hours. Efficiency doesn’t change the ethical obligation to bill accurately.

Looking forward, AI may make flat-fee, subscription, or value-based billing even more appealing, and potentially fairer, for both lawyers and clients.

4. Create & Follow an AI Policy

Every legal workplace should have a clear AI policy that identifies which tools are approved and for what purposes. Policies should address accuracy verification, confidentiality, billing, client disclosure (if applicable), and training.

An AI policy isn’t just risk management; it helps teams innovate responsibly.

5. Embrace AI Within Ethical Boundaries

The goal isn’t to avoid generative AI altogether. Used responsibly, it can help lawyers work faster, serve more clients, reduce costs, and expand access to justice. The legal profession has always evolved alongside new technology, and AI is simply the next chapter.

Explore it, learn it, and understand where it can add value, but do so with your ethical duties and workplace rules front of mind.

Generative AI is a powerful tool, not a shortcut. When lawyers combine new technology with time-tested professional values, clients benefit and the justice system becomes stronger.

NOTE: Licensees have free access to an AI resource hub powered by LexisAI. Log in to your Practice Portal and add the Lexis card to explore white papers, webinars, and videos about best practices using AI in the legal profession.

Utah Judiciary Responds to Threats in Redistricting Case

PRESS RELEASE

Salt Lake City, Utah (November 17, 2025) — In response to multiple requests for comment regarding Judge Dianna Gibson’s ruling in the Utah Women Voters v. Utah State Legislature redistricting case, the Utah Judiciary issues the following statement:

Though the Utah Judiciary does not comment on the specifics of any threats made toward judges or court employees, we acknowledge that such incidents have recently occurred. We call on everyone to approach concerns involving the courts with civility, respect, and constructive dialogue.

Threats of violence against judges or court personnel are unacceptable, dangerous, and may violate state or federal law. Any conduct aimed at causing fear for a ruling or undermining the safe operation of the justice system strikes at the heart of the rule of law. Such actions endanger not only the individuals targeted but the functioning of the justice system itself.

Judges have a constitutional duty to apply the law to the facts before them, independent of external pressures. That independence is essential to preserving the separation of powers and ensuring that justice is administered fairly and impartially.

When parties disagree with a judicial ruling, the appropriate and lawful avenue for addressing those concerns is the established appellate process. Utah’s courts provide a structured and transparent system for reviewing decisions and correcting potential errors, reinforcing public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process.

We encourage all Utahns to stand with the Judiciary in protecting the safety of our judges and employees and protecting the fair and impartial administration of justice.

###

CONTACT: Tania Mashburn
She/Her/Hers
Director of Communications
801-712-4545
taniam@utcourts.gov

RELATED: Utah State Bar Statement on Call for Judge Gibson Impeachment

Search UtahBar.org