By: Arend J. Abel, Attorney
You may remember just over a year ago when a partner in Barnes & Thornburg’s Chicago office was sanctioned for live-tweeting a trial. That event makes all the more surprising an Ethics Opinion that the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications issued last month. According to the Commission, live-tweeting a trial does not amount to “Broadcasting,” which is barred by Rule 2.17 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, except in very narrow circumstances or with prior permission of the Supreme Court.
by: Arend J. Abel, Attorney
Any lawyer who pays attention to legal ethics issues in Indiana by now has heard of In re Anonymous. 6 N.E.3d 903 (2014). The most widely talked about aspect of the case was the fact that the disciplined lawyer was somehow caught off-guard because he sought out legal advice and other opinions and believed he was in compliance with the rules. There was a hue and cry that enforcement against the lawyer was unfair or even a violation of due process, either because the client testimonials that the Court held violated the rules were on a website the lawyer couldn’t control, or because the rules were unclear on what amounts to a violation.