Quantcast

It might be unintentional …. and still cost your firm $1,000,000

A billing attorney runs a SDN search in Conflicts and although it appeared as though the client’s name is OK, and proceeds to open a matter. However, when opening a matter, very little might be known about a client and as the matter unfolds more complexities enter the picture. Firms are now dealing in a global economy, what appears to be straightforward, may not be.

 Is the firm safe from the $1,000,000 unintentional representation of a SDN terrorist person or organization? I don’t know the answer to this, risk is sometimes very difficult to assess.

 The question here is a matter of best practices, to at least manage the risks. I suspect there are many firms that do not even conduct SDN searches. There are no guarantees, but a million dollars is a lot of money.

 What are your law firms “best practices” and how often do you run a SDN search AFTER a matter is open?

 Post your comments on my blog on how your firm manages this potential risk and I’ll publish the results on a future blog posting.

 To learn more details on OFAC and the SDN list check out some of my previous blog postings on the topic.

Check here

and here

and here

Searching the Searches

The phone rang in the New York office about six hours before it rang in Chicago. Litigation attorneys in both offices were eager to talk to a new very large potential client. Both were able to gather enough facts to start a new matter intake form with basic conflict search criteria and assured the client that they should be able to respond in a day or two. The client was eager to get things rolling and time was critical. Luckily the firm had excellent procedures in place and highly qualified paralegals ran the conflict searches in both offices, they were free and clear, no issues whatsoever.

We have a new client!  Like clockwork, engagement letters went out to each of the inquirers and work had already begun. It wasn’t until the Friday “new client/matter” report came out to the partners that the discovery was made, it was the same client. Obviously the client had internal issues with more than one contact seeking legal assistance, but nonetheless, the firm too was embarrassed. Could it have been much worse, sure … the firm could have been representing multiple opposing parties in a complex matter.

So, how do you know in a multi-office, distributed environment if the firm isn’t talking to the same or opposing parties on a conflicting matter that surface in a short period of time? The answer is to structure your conflict search system to not just search on the normal stuff, but to also search on “ searches.” If the system allowed the search on searches capability, the second occurrence would have immediately caught the first search and pending engagement, allowing one of the two attorneys to inform the client of the situation. The client would have been impressed with the level of communication within the firm even between remote locations.

Searching previous searches also provides another valuable business tool, why was past representation turned down? In most systems there is probably no record of past declined opportunities and the reason they were declined. Many declines for representation are not legal conflict issues, they are business issues. Without a well constructed database and proceedure to providing the reason for declining an engagement and the ability to find all this on a conflicts search what we declined yesterday, might be accepted today.

Searching on searches is a Best Practice for all law firms.

Conflict Searching Technology for the SDN List

Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) prohibits attorneys from accepting fees from any individual or organization shown on the SDN list (Specifically Designated Nationals). According to an ABA publication “If the client is listed, the attorney may collect fees from the client only if and when OFAC grants a specific license. …

There are two issues a firm faces when dealing with any complex conflicts search including the SDN List.

  1. How to get the SDN list into your conflicts data base
  2. Technology needed to conduct complex searches

The best way to search the SDN List is to first import the entire list into a database. Luckily the list is available in XML format, therefore download the XML Version of the SDN List and the XML SDN Schema (XSD File). The Schema XSD file just validated the data types used in the XML version of the list.

Once the list is imported into your database you should be able to just search it … right? One  major issue regarding conflict searches revolves around the speed and accuracy of the internal search engine performing the search.  Many search tools today rely strictly on a database search engine to hunt for the data similar to looking up a client’s name.  However, this type of search may not be fast enough nor provide what you need.  For example, a user might search for (“Jim” or “James”) and “Hammond”.  In this case the software might generate a SQL query to select from a table name and a field name where “Jim” might occur.  The system would then look through dozens of tables in the database for which there might be a million or more records, only to find a single occurrence of “Jim,” then the system would have to perform the same process for “James,” and another pass through for “Hammond.”  The system would then compare the three record sets and return to the user one or more hits.  Not a very efficient process even for a simple search of one name.  As powerful as today’s databases are, they are inefficient in performing complex searches in an ad-hoc fashion.  Looking for something like “Jim” within five words of “Hammond?”  Forget it.

The technology needed incorporates a full-text search engine that is designed to find and compare results in an instant.  This engine performs searches from an “index”.  Think of the index as the back of an encyclopedia.  Instead of searching through each page of the entire book, you would simply go to the index, look down the list in alphabetical order for the word “Swahili,” and see that it shows that there are references to “Swahili” on various pages.  This is exactly how a full-text search engine works.  It continually builds an index of all the words in your database and searches on the index to find conflict hits, rather than searching directly in the database.  Full-text search engine find search results in a split-second.

This technology allows the firm to “index” the entire SDN List that was imported into a set of database tables, the indexer automatically updates the index of all words contained in the SDN List. Searches can then be immediately performed on the newest SDN List. Since the SDN List is periodically updated, OFAC allows a firm to subscribe to a notification service that alerts the firm when a new list is available for downloading. Routine changes to the SDN list include both additions and deletions.

All firms should be aware of their requirements under OFAC. A best of breed search engine should also provide phonetic and fuzzy logic search capabilities. This will further assist the firm in finding complex names under different spellings that might appear on the SDN List. Firms requiring additional information about OFAC and the SDN List should contact OFAC and their professional liability insurance carrier directly.


If One of These is Your Client – You Might Have a Problem

Is one of these companies’ a client of yours? If so you might be in trouble.

  • Advanced Electronics Development, Ltd  
  • Falcon Systems 
  • Investacast Precision Castings, Ltd.

These companies all have names that you might find in any city in the US, they sure look like they would be OK to have as clients. However, all of those listed above are shown on the June 29, 2010 SDN List published by the US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC).  OFAC prohibits attorneys from accepting fees from any individual or organization shown on the SDN list (Specifically Designated Nationals). Failure to comply with OFAC regulations can result in a $1 million fine if unintentional and up to $10 million along with 10 – 30 years in prison if intentional. According to an ABA publication “If the client is listed, the attorney may collect fees from the client only if and when OFAC grants a specific license. … OFAC has already initiated actions against attorneys and law firms for failing to comply with the regulations”. The SDN list includes persons suspected of aiding terrorists, as well as narcotic traffickers and countries subject to U.S. embargoes. Some major insurance carriers have indicated law firms need to implement training for their attorneys and set OFAC searching procedures in place as a condition maintaining their professional liability insurance.

Searching for Terrorists may not quite be as easy as it seems. Various ethnic names may naturally raise some suspicions; however the majority of these names represent people who are not on the SDN list. Other names that appear to be common company names appear on the list. You may find that you have a client who was placed on the SDN List in error. The natural tool to use for searching may be your existing conflict of interest system. Unfortunately many law firm systems lack the proper search tools to conduct such searches. Furthermore compounding the problem is that most of today’s systems also lack the ability to automatically import the OFAC provided SDN List.

In a future blog posting I’ll discuss search technology that makes it easier to search the SDN List.

Gallery
ist2_5516813-business-people-joining-their-hands ist2_7730216-library-tables ist2_11425109-business-woman-with-colleagues-at-the-back
Blogroll
Follow RainMaker