Ethical Issues in Legal Outsourcing

For the purposes of this article, we will assess thepractice of law. However, assisting others in the
American Bar Association ("ABA") Standingunauthorized practice of law is not a clearly defined
Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibilityaction, which means a lawyer should be very careful in
Formal Opinion 08-451: 451 Lawyer's Obligations Whendeciding which tasks to delegate or outsource and
Outsourcing Legal and Nonlegal Support Services,must supervise work performed in an appropriate
published August 5, 2008, and what it tells us aboutmanner. The appropriate level of supervision is
global legal process outsourcing from the perspectivedependent on several factors including the complexity
of an American lawyer. Formal Opinion 08-451 touchesof work to be performed, skills of the workers,
on key ethical concerns a lawyer or law firm haseducation of the workers, and other factors.
when outsourcing legal and non-legal work. The opinionThe opinion recognizes the existence of a global
acts as a guideline for ethical practice, and the ethicaleconomy and the fact that lawyers can save on
engagement and management of a legal processcosts, and can sometimes pass this savings onto the
outsourcing (LPO) provider. The opinion refers to theclient when the outsourced services are performed at
Model Rules of Professional Conduct as amended bya much lower rate than they would have been
the ABA House of Delegates through February 2008.performed domestically or regionally. The opinion, in
A lawyer is allowed to outsource legal and non-legalreference to small law firms handling large
work although he/she must be ethically responsible fordiscovery-intensive litigation, states:
the work performed. Outsourcing is generally allowedOutsourcing, however, can enable that firm to
though the lawyer retained in a matter is stillrepresent a client in such a matter effectively and
responsible to his/her client for any work performed inefficiently, by engaging additional lawyers to conduct
furtherance of his/her representation of the client. Thedepositions or to review and analyze documents,
opinion states that Model Rule 5.1 and 5.3 apply to thetogether with a temporary staff of legal assistants to
outsourcing relationship, which means that lawyersprovide infrastructural support.
acting in a supervisory capacity must take reasonableThe overriding factor when a lawyer provides
steps to ensure that the Rules of Professionalrepresentation is that he/she renders competent
Conduct are being adhered to by subordinate lawyersrepresentation to his/her client with the "legal
and/or non-lawyer assistants. Supervising lawyers areknowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation
responsible for violations of the Rules of Professionalreasonably necessary for the representation." The
Conduct by subordinates if there is knowledge oropinion goes on to state that some lawyers may do all
ratification of bad conduct, or if there is knowledge ofof the work himself/herself, some may delegate
the bad conduct when it could still be avoided orcertain things to a staff, or some may outsource
mitigated but no remedial action is taken. Supervising orcertain types of work. Lawyers can be equally
managing lawyers will obviously always be responsiblecompetent in their representation of a client though
for violations of ethical duties if they order the wrongthey differ in how much they utilize legal support
conduct in the first place.services while providing representation for their clients.
In pertinent part of Model Rule 1.6, the supervisingThe two main challenges in this regard for a lawyer
attorney must disclose outsourcing activities to his/herwho outsources are 1) that tasks are delegated to
client, if the activities involve the disclosure ofindividuals who are competent to perform them, and 2)
confidential information, and obtain the informedthat they can oversee the project adequately and
consent of his/her client, or may not have to obtainappropriately. One of the main factors in obtaining LPO
informed consent from the client if the disclosure ofservices is that the LPO personnel has sufficient
confidential information is impliedly authorized in order toexperience and appropriate education for providing the
carry out the representation. It seems that the safestservices in question and that the supervising lawyer
and most ethical way to outsource work would be toshould provide a reasonable amount of oversight
get your client's informed consent. Although there areregarding the project.
issues regarding: whether the work to be performedWhat constitutes reasonable oversight will depend on
involves confidential information, and whether there isseveral factors. A lawyer or a law firm outsourcing
implied authorization to relate certain information in thework should consider doing reference checks, and
normal course of representation, it is best to inform,background checks on the LPO. Principal attorneys in
educate, and ultimately gain the client's written informeda direct outsourcing scenario should be interviewed,
consent when engaging an LPO provider who will beand LPO's should be questioned about hiring practices
employing foreign workers for your client's benefit.regarding the quality and the character of their
Strict confidentiality agreements must be in place withemployees. The higher the complexity and sensitivity
your LPO provider and conflict of interests must beof the work to be performed, the more thorough the
checked prior to engagement on a specific matter.investigation into the LPO's security and
Under Model Rule 1.5, the attorney must not charge hisprofessionalism should be, which can include visiting the
her client an unreasonable fee or for unreasonableforeign operations in some instances. When engaging
expenses in regards to the outsourced work. Thisforeign educated lawyers, the foreign legal education
means that the the cost of outsourcing can be passedsystem must be assessed and compared the
to the client but it can not be an unreasonableAmerican legal education system, and the foreign
expense. It is possible that the attorney or law firmprofessional regulatory system should be evaluated
could charge the client with a surcharge forfor core ethical principles. This comparative evaluation
outsourced work, but the surcharge would have to beis not meant to reject or accept a foreign country for
reasonable. Ultimately this additional fee would beoutsourcing services, but is meant to provide a lawyer
strictly related to management and supervision of thewith an idea of how much scrutiny they should apply
LPO relationship, project management fees if you will. Ifto the work performed by a particular group of foreign
the lawyer or law firm passes the cost to their clientworkers.
as a pure disbursement, no mark-up is allowed.The opinion also raises the question of how susceptible
It is paramount, and should be obvious to any practicingconfidential client information is to seizure in judicial or
lawyer, that under Model Rule 5.5, a lawyer must avoidadministrative proceedings in a foreign country. At this
assisting others in the unauthorized practice of law.point in time it seems that confidential or sensitive
The opinion goes on to note that many lawyersinformation should be housed within the United States
outsource work to "other lawyers or nonlawyers, aswith very restricted access by workers who are
independent contractors, directly or throughoverseas. It does not seem practical to rely on any
intermediaries, on a temporary or an ongoing basis, toforeign judicial system in reference to protecting
provide various legal and nonlegal support services,"confidential information, so to take that out of the
and speaks of the various types of work outsourcedequation, sensitive information should only be housed
including "the engagement of a group of foreignand accessed within and from the United States. Any
lawyers to draft patent applications or develop legalLPO that has unlimited access to this information
strategies and prepare motion papers in U.S. litigation."overseas is going to be a huge headache for U.S. legal
The opinion implicitly states that by outsourcing to apractitioners from a practical point of view. For this
LPO for work equivalent in complexity to draftingsame reason, it seems like a very delicate situation
patent applications, development of legal strategies, orwhen trying to contract with a completely
preparation of motion papers to be used in the U.S.,foreign-based LPO, so delicate that it is probably not
lawyers are NOT assisting others in the unauthorizedworth the administrative and ethical headaches.