Jump to content
Cramcramps

Fired from articling

Recommended Posts

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-law-firm-ordered-to-pay-student-nearly-70-000-1.5249589

Doroshenko accused the student of breach of contract, theft, trespassing and wrongful use of marketing materials belonging to the firm. The judge dismissed the allegations, noting they were "harsh and unwarranted."  

Gomery also noted the firm's actions — including serving a lawsuit against Ojanen in front of her classmates, rather than mailing it to her — was "unnecessary and psychologically brutal."

After she was fired, Ojanen struggled to find employment and pay rent, according to the ruling.

She lived out of her car for three months — and when her husband, whom she is separated from, repossessed the vehicle, she briefly lived on the streets before her parents took her in. 

"Pending the resolution of this lawsuit, her life has been on hold," wrote Gomery.  

Ojanen was awarded $50,000 for aggravated damages, as well as ordinary damages of $18,934 for lost wages.

and here's the decision:

https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2019/2019bcsc1352/2019bcsc1352.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s the same firm that sued a person over a bad google review, so I think it’s fair to say they take a “make an example” approach that isn’t necessarily common with other offices. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hegdis said:

That’s the same firm that sued a person over a bad google review, so I think it’s fair to say they take a “make an example” approach that isn’t necessarily common with other offices. 

It's also the firm that did a lot for the legal community - like give us this gem: 

 

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, BertyBewp said:

Same. A lot of the work I do ends up being published in industry papers/newsletters, and our link to many specific projects is available on a website I'm sure at least some of you have been to. That website is managed/updated by the clients. Obviously as a solicitor, the specifics of my deals are confidential, but the overall fact that it was done, and by us, is public knowledge.

I think there is a nuance here that is generally not applicable to the situation we're describing: your client updates the website; you're not doing the disclosing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are grey areas. But regardless of whether the information is publicly available, confidentiality is not the solicitor's to waive. Didn't Eddie Greenspan get in trouble for this back in the day when he helped to produce a crime series based partially on some cases of his? My memory is that he was sanctioned even though any details similar to those in his cases were publicly available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, conge said:

I think there is a nuance here that is generally not applicable to the situation we're describing: your client updates the website; you're not doing the disclosing. 

Very fair point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, conge said:

I've always been taught not to even disclose that someone is a client, even if that's public knowledge, unless the client asks you to, or you've cleared in advance (e.g., you're giving a panel talk and want to talk about the case).

The reason being is that the confidentiality belongs to them; just because some ppl know about the case, doesn't mean everyone should, and they get to decide who hears about it from me. 

That may be taking the ethical duty of client confidentiality to the extreme and a reflection of where I was trained, but it seems reasonable to me. And it's easy to follow: I just don't talk about my clients. 

I'm genuinely curious as I ask this - it's not unusual for me to be contacted by counsel on an unrelated matter asking me if my client has appealed a certain decision as they want to rely on it for their own case. In that circumstance, would you view it that you're not in a position to acknowledge that you're counsel for that client, and that you would need to seek your client's instructions before being able to respond in any way? (Let's assume an appeal was completed but unreported, or that the appeal period has long since passed. I'm not talking about a situation where the decision to appeal or not can still be made).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Blurg said:

I'm genuinely curious as I ask this - it's not unusual for me to be contacted by counsel on an unrelated matter asking me if my client has appealed a certain decision as they want to rely on it for their own case. In that circumstance, would you view it that you're not in a position to acknowledge that you're counsel for that client, and that you would need to seek your client's instructions before being able to respond in any way? (Let's assume an appeal was completed but unreported, or that the appeal period has long since passed. I'm not talking about a situation where the decision to appeal or not can still be made).

I think this will always depend on the particular facts (and obviously I'm not offering advice here). But if it's a private conversation between members of the bar and your friend already knows you acted for someone in such and such matter, which is public knowledge in any event, and all he's asking for is general guidance, then I don't think it would be unusual to discuss what kinds of things the court was looking for, what worked and what didn't, things to avoid, etc. You wouldn't disclose the reason why you did or didn't appeal or anything that would reveal the content of privileged conversations. But giving general guidance to a colleague to better the expertise of the bar is, I think, different from disclosing to a non-lawyer or the public and since you're the lawyer it's your own ass on the line (rather than an employee risking your ass for you by their own indiscretion).

That said, I don't know that I'm often in that precise situation. Normally, if I'm discussing with a friend about a case in the way you mention, it's without knowledge or disclosure of names or other identifying information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Blurg said:

I'm genuinely curious as I ask this - it's not unusual for me to be contacted by counsel on an unrelated matter asking me if my client has appealed a certain decision as they want to rely on it for their own case. In that circumstance, would you view it that you're not in a position to acknowledge that you're counsel for that client, and that you would need to seek your client's instructions before being able to respond in any way? (Let's assume an appeal was completed but unreported, or that the appeal period has long since passed. I'm not talking about a situation where the decision to appeal or not can still be made).

Are there any successful appeals that still go unreported in Canada? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Are there any successful appeals that still go unreported in Canada? 

That's confidential.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Are there any successful appeals that still go unreported in Canada? 

It may not be about whether the appeal was successful or not. If there's a case that's in favour of a certain type of institutional client at the ONSC level, and the matter was appealed and dismissed by endorsement (which may not be reported), then that information may be something you want to point out to another ONSC judge if you're arguing a similar position for a similar institutional client. 

46 minutes ago, Mountebank said:

I think this will always depend on the particular facts (and obviously I'm not offering advice here). But if it's a private conversation between members of the bar and your friend already knows you acted for someone in such and such matter, which is public knowledge in any event, and all he's asking for is general guidance, then I don't think it would be unusual to discuss what kinds of things the court was looking for, what worked and what didn't, things to avoid, etc. You wouldn't disclose the reason why you did or didn't appeal or anything that would reveal the content of privileged conversations. But giving general guidance to a colleague to better the expertise of the bar is, I think, different from disclosing to a non-lawyer or the public and since you're the lawyer it's your own ass on the line (rather than an employee risking your ass for you by their own indiscretion).

That said, I don't know that I'm often in that precise situation. Normally, if I'm discussing with a friend about a case in the way you mention, it's without knowledge or disclosure of names or other identifying information.

It's an interesting discussion. To be clear, I'm not referring to discussing it with a friend. I'm referring to a cold call from another lawyer I don't know. I've also done the same thing in reverse - this may be unique to some of the types of cases I work on. I was curious how this may intersect with conge's position of being trained to not identify someone as your client at all without their consent.  

Anyways, apologies for the derail away from OP's original question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Blurg said:

It may not be about whether the appeal was successful or not. If there's a case that's in favour of a certain type of institutional client at the ONSC level, and the matter was appealed and dismissed by endorsement (which may not be reported), then that information may be something you want to point out to another ONSC judge if you're arguing a similar position for a similar institutional client. 

It's an interesting discussion. To be clear, I'm not referring to discussing it with a friend. I'm referring to a cold call from another lawyer I don't know. I've also done the same thing in reverse - this may be unique to some of the types of cases I work on. I was curious how this may intersect with conge's position of being trained to not identify someone as your client at all without their consent.  

Anyways, apologies for the derail away from OP's original question. 

It is a very good question. To be honest, something like that has never happened to me, so I don't know how I would handle it. My instinct are a bit conflicted one this one; first, it's a lawyer asking, so I'm less worried than if it were press or the public, but my gut is telling me I should call me client, tell them what's up - if it's truly no big deal, then client should be able to confirm that quickly and I've had a chance to build a bit more of a relationship with client.  

Edited by conge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2020 at 4:22 PM, setto said:

It's also the firm that did a lot for the legal community - like give us this gem: 

 

..............What the f*** did I just watch.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DavisFromCornerGas said:

..............What the f*** did I just watch.

In fairness the target audience for those videos is drunk-driving idiots they are trying to market their firm to, not the legal community. It's the old Saul Goodman strategy.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't @kurrika once say something along the lines of "selling your dignity is never worth it"? I'm paraphrasing, but it holds true.

 

Yeesh. Also, from a purely nitpicky standpoint: I honestly thought they were singing about breaching a no-contact order, so on top of every other vile sin that video just committed against my poor eyes and ears, its message is muddy to boot! (Though admittedly I didn't make it through the whole video before throwing my laptop at the nearest wall in a desperate attempt to save my aforementioned poor eyes and ears, so perhaps I'm to blame for the mixup.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DavisFromCornerGas said:

Didn't @kurrika once say something along the lines of "selling your dignity is never worth it"? I'm paraphrasing, but it holds true.

 

Yeesh. Also, from a purely nitpicky standpoint: I honestly thought they were singing about breaching a no-contact order, so on top of every other vile sin that video just committed against my poor eyes and ears, its message is muddy to boot! (Though admittedly I didn't make it through the whole video before throwing my laptop at the nearest wall in a desperate attempt to save my aforementioned poor eyes and ears, so perhaps I'm to blame for the mixup.)

Maybe I can blame Rebecca Black’s 2011 hit single Friday for destroying my musical tastes, but I do find that song kind of catchy...

*cue off pitch singing*
”My LaWyeR TolD ME nOt tO TaLk to YOU!”

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2020 at 3:24 PM, Amorfati1 said:

 

Quote

Acumen and Mr. Doroshenko plead that Ms. Ojanen adopted a practice of avoiding responsibility by deliberately pretending to misunderstand instructions making it effectively impossible for the lawyers to assign her work that was not menial.  In his evidence in chief, Mr. Doroshenko invoked a sexist stereotype of female incompetence in describing this alleged practice.

What a stand-up guy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JohnStuartHobbes said:

Maybe I can blame Rebecca Black’s 2011 hit single Friday for destroying my musical tastes, but I do find that song kind of catchy...

*cue off pitch singing*
”My LaWyeR TolD ME nOt tO TaLk to YOU!”

 

Hello Paul.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...