Empiricum's Guest Editorial - Inside the Lawyer's Den

In handling legal matters, even the simplest task of giving legal advice off the cuff, the competence of the lawyer is presumed until the lawyer proves otherwise. After all, passing the bar examinations is not an easy task. However, this article does not deal on the professional competence of a lawyer. Rather, it probes the lawyer's sincerity in purpose short of integrity. Simply put, this article deals on the professional honesty of a lawyer.

While it is true that in legal matters there are two sides in every issue, the lawyer should exercise with deliberate care in the assessment of issues imbued with public interest. Case in point is the recent news concerning the raid on some Intel corporate offices in Europe by EU investigators. Included in that news is a statement that:

***In March, Japan's Fair Trade Commission (FTC) found that Intel had violated antitrust laws by offering rebates to five PC makers that agreed either not to buy or to limit their purchases of chips made by AMD or other rivals.*** [EU officials raid U.S. chipmaker Intel, others]

That truly sounds like an active form of anti-trust violation to defeat competition. Which brings to mind Rambus' own shredding party over pizza allegedly held in contemplation of litigation. On matters like these, corporate legal counsel should bear personal responsibility. The corporation should require counsel to obtain professional liability insurance coverage to answer for damages that the corporation may be required to pay under a vicarious liability theory and expressly assert its subrogation rights against the liability insurance company. The corporation must also recognize that if it fails or refuses to enforce its subrogation rights, shareholders may file a derivative suit. Shareholders must not bear the financial brunt for the errors of corporate counsel.

~oo0oo~