<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tech Competence Archives | LawSites</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.lawnext.com/category/tech-competence/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.lawnext.com/category/tech-competence</link>
	<description>Tracking new and intriguing websites and products for the legal profession.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 17:38:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Another State Moves Towards Adopting Duty of Tech Competence and Mandatory Tech CLE for Lawyers</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2024/11/another-state-moves-towards-adopting-duty-of-tech-competence-and-mandatory-tech-cle-for-lawyers.html</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 17:38:38 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=48263</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" fetchpriority="high" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />The New Jersey Supreme Court is seeking comments on proposals to adopt the duty of technology competence for lawyers and to add a technology requirement for continuing legal education. If the court ultimately adopts the proposals, New Jersey would become the 41st state to require technology competence for lawyers and the fourth state to require [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York Becomes First State to Mandate CLE in Cybersecurity, Privacy and Data Protection</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2022/08/new-york-becomes-first-state-to-mandate-cle-in-cybersecurity-privacy-and-data-protection.html</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2022 12:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=41139</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="1024" height="576" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/hacking-3112539_1280-1024x576.png" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/hacking-3112539_1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/hacking-3112539_1280-300x169.png 300w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/hacking-3112539_1280-768x432.png 768w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/hacking-3112539_1280.png 1280w" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />New York has become the first U.S. state to mandate that attorneys take continuing legal education courses in cybersecurity, privacy and data protection. Under the new requirement, all attorneys must complete one hour of training every two years in either the ethical obligations surrounding cybersecurity, privacy and data protection, or in the technological and practice-related [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ontario Court Lays Down the Law on Technology Competence and Video Proceedings</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2021/12/ontario-court-lays-down-the-law-on-technology-competence-and-video-proceedings.html</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:14:36 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=38511</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />An Ontario judge has laid down the law on technology competence, ruling in no uncertain terms that every lawyer has a duty to keep pace with changing technology, and that a lawyer&#8217;s discomfort with new technologies — in this case, video depositions — is no excuse for reverting to pre-pandemic methods. &#8220;With the current pace [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Ethics Principles Call for Proficiency in Technology, Caution in Social Media, for Canadian Judges</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2021/06/new-ethics-principles-call-for-proficiency-in-technology-caution-in-social-media-for-canadian-judges.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2021/06/new-ethics-principles-call-for-proficiency-in-technology-caution-in-social-media-for-canadian-judges.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:41:50 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=36810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="854" height="480" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CanadaEthicsPrinciplesJudges.png" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CanadaEthicsPrinciplesJudges.png 854w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CanadaEthicsPrinciplesJudges-300x169.png 300w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CanadaEthicsPrinciplesJudges-768x432.png 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 854px) 100vw, 854px" />Two years ago, I wrote a column calling for the duty of technology — which applies to lawyers in 39 states — to be extended to judges. While that has not happened in the United States, it has now happened in Canada. Yesterday, the Canadian Judicial Council published a new and modernized edition of its [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2021/06/new-ethics-principles-call-for-proficiency-in-technology-caution-in-social-media-for-canadian-judges.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>And Now Another State Adopts Duty of Tech Competence, Bringing Total to 38</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/12/and-now-another-state-adopts-duty-of-tech-competence-bringing-total-to-38.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/12/and-now-another-state-adopts-duty-of-tech-competence-bringing-total-to-38.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 17:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=31208</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="1024" height="575" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/network-4143317-169-1024x575.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/network-4143317-169-1024x575.jpg 1024w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/network-4143317-169-300x169.jpg 300w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/network-4143317-169-768x431.jpg 768w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/network-4143317-169.jpg 1280w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />When it rains it pours. Earlier today, I wrote about adoption of the duty of technology competence by the Federation of Law Societies of Canada. Now comes word of another U.S. state adopting the duty, bringing the total number of states to 38. The latest is South Carolina, where on the day before Thanksgiving, the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/12/and-now-another-state-adopts-duty-of-tech-competence-bringing-total-to-38.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Duty of Tech Competence Comes to Canada</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/12/duty-of-tech-competence-comes-to-canada.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/12/duty-of-tech-competence-comes-to-canada.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:51:35 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=31203</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="987" height="555" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/shutterstock_587263805.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/shutterstock_587263805.jpg 987w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/shutterstock_587263805-300x169.jpg 300w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/shutterstock_587263805-768x432.jpg 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 987px) 100vw, 987px" />Ever since 2012, when the American Bar Association amended the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to include a duty of technology competence, adoption has spread across the United States, with 37 states having now formally adopted some version of Model Rule 1.1, Comment 8. But the U.S. is not alone in considering lawyers&#8217; duty to [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/12/duty-of-tech-competence-comes-to-canada.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Does A Lawyer Get Competent in Tech? I Asked Twitter and Got 100+ Answers</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/11/how-does-a-lawyer-get-competent-in-tech-i-asked-twitter-and-got-100-answers.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/11/how-does-a-lawyer-get-competent-in-tech-i-asked-twitter-and-got-100-answers.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=30952</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="983" height="552" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/competence-169jpg.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/competence-169jpg.jpg 983w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/competence-169jpg-300x168.jpg 300w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/competence-169jpg-768x431.jpg 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 983px) 100vw, 983px" />When I give presentations on lawyers&#8217; ethical duty to be competent in technology, audience members often come up to me afterwards and ask something to the effect of, &#8220;Ok, I get it, but how do I become competent in technology?&#8221; Preparing for another such talk this week, I thought I&#8217;d put the question to Twitter, [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/11/how-does-a-lawyer-get-competent-in-tech-i-asked-twitter-and-got-100-answers.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Georgia Moves Closer to Adopting Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/11/georgia-moves-closer-to-adopting-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/11/georgia-moves-closer-to-adopting-duty-of-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2019 12:43:38 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=30832</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />The Board of Governors of the State Bar of Georgia have voted to approve proposed changes to the state&#8217;s Rules of Professional Conduct that would adopt the duty of technology competence. The proposed changes will now be published for a 30-day comment period and then submitted for approval to the Georgia Supreme Court. To date, [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/11/georgia-moves-closer-to-adopting-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>A 37th State Adopts the Ethical Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/09/a-37th-state-adopts-the-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/09/a-37th-state-adopts-the-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2019 18:42:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=30418</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />Michigan today become the 37th state to adopt the ethical duty of technology competence for lawyers. The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order adopting a variation of Model Rule 1.1, Comment 8, of the American Bar Association&#8217;s Model Rules of Professional Conduct. [See my Tech Competence page where I track the states that have adopted [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/09/a-37th-state-adopts-the-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Michigan Seeks Input On Adopting Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/07/michigan-seeks-input-on-adopting-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/07/michigan-seeks-input-on-adopting-duty-of-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2019 12:27:42 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29942</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />Thirty-six states have adopted the duty of technology competence for lawyers, and now Michigan is considering joining the list with proposed changes to its Rules of Professional Conduct. In April, the Michigan Supreme Court put out a request for public comment with regard to proposed amendments to Rules 1.1 and 1.6 of its professional conduct [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/07/michigan-seeks-input-on-adopting-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>D.C. Bar Mulls Rules Changes Governing Technology Competence, Data Storage</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/d-c-bar-mulls-rules-changes-governing-technology-competence-data-storage.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/d-c-bar-mulls-rules-changes-governing-technology-competence-data-storage.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2019 16:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29751</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />A committee tasked with reviewing the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct has recommended adoption of revisions designed to underscore that a lawyer&#8217;s duty to provide competent representation extends to use of technology. In addition, the committee has recommended changes to make clear that a lawyer&#8217;s duty to protect the confidentiality of client information [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/d-c-bar-mulls-rules-changes-governing-technology-competence-data-storage.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Maine&#8217;s New CLE Rule Gives A Tepid Nod To Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/maines-new-cle-rule-gives-a-tepid-nod-to-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/maines-new-cle-rule-gives-a-tepid-nod-to-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2019 12:50:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29651</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />As regular readers of this blog know, I track the states that have adopted the duty of technology competence for lawyers. As of this writing, 36 states have done so. In addition, two states have revised their CLE rules to require ongoing technology training for lawyers. Maine has done neither &#8212; it has adopted neither [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/maines-new-cle-rule-gives-a-tepid-nod-to-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Shouldn&#8217;t Judges Be Subject To The Duty of Technology Competence?</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/shouldnt-judges-be-subject-to-the-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/shouldnt-judges-be-subject-to-the-duty-of-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2019 20:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29582</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If you are a regular reader of this blog, you have probably noticed that I have closely followed the evolution of the duty of technology competence for lawyers, frequently writing about it and even devoting a page to tracking states&#8217; adoption of the duty. The duty is derived from the American Bar Association&#8217;s Model Rules [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/05/shouldnt-judges-be-subject-to-the-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Michigan Could Be Next to Adopt Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/04/michigan-could-be-next-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/04/michigan-could-be-next-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29495</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />The roster of states that have adopted the duty of technology competence for lawyers is at 36, but now Michigan is on track to possibly make it 37. Yesterday, the Michigan Supreme Court posted a notice that it is considering adopting the duty and requesting public comment. The proposal would amend a paragraph of the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/04/michigan-could-be-next-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Role of Small Bar Associations in Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/03/the-role-of-small-bar-associations-in-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/03/the-role-of-small-bar-associations-in-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2019 13:12:44 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29243</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="1024" height="576" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-1024x576.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-300x169.jpg 300w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-768x432.jpg 768w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-2048x1152.jpg 2048w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_1856-1-1568x882.jpg 1568w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />I spent last Friday with the good people of the Monroe County Bar Association in Rochester, N.Y. at their second-annual Solo and Small Firm Conference. From speaking with and listening to lawyers there, I was reminded of how far we still have to go in getting lawyers up to speed on technology. But it was also a demonstration [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/03/the-role-of-small-bar-associations-in-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Texas Is Latest State To Adopt Duty Of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/03/texas-is-latest-state-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/03/texas-is-latest-state-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2019 14:22:33 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=29193</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />A big space just got filled in on my map of the states that have adopted the ethical duty of technology competence for lawyers, as Texas becomes the 36th state to do so. On Feb. 26, 2019, the Supreme Court of Texas entered an order amending Paragraph 8 of Rule 1.01 of the Texas Disciplinary [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/03/texas-is-latest-state-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>One More State Adopts Duty of Technology Competence (Sort Of)</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/01/one-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-sort.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/01/one-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-sort.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 18:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=28828</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />I&#8217;m adding another to my list of states that have adopted the duty of technology competence for lawyers, although this state has done it in a somewhat different way. Louisiana has amended its Code of Professionalism for lawyers to add two provisions related to lawyers&#8217; use of social media. The two provisions related to technology [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2019/01/one-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-sort.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two More States Have Adopted Duty of Tech Competence; Total Now 34</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/12/two-states-adopted-duty-tech-competence-total-now-34.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/12/two-states-adopted-duty-tech-competence-total-now-34.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2018 14:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=28657</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />In my continuing quest to track the states that have adopted the duty of technology competence for lawyers, I have learned of two more that should be on the list, bringing the total to 34. The new additions to the list are Alaska and Montana. Both adopted the rule some time ago, but I somehow [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/12/two-states-adopted-duty-tech-competence-total-now-34.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>North Carolina Becomes Second State to Mandate Technology Training for Lawyers</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/12/north-carolina-becomes-second-state-mandate-technology-training-lawyers.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/12/north-carolina-becomes-second-state-mandate-technology-training-lawyers.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 17:17:47 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=28645</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />North Carolina has become the second state to mandate continuing education for lawyers in technology. Beginning in 2019, all lawyers will be required to complete one hour per year of CLE devoted to technology training. In 2016, Florida became the first state to mandate technology training for lawyers, when it adopted a rule requiring lawyers [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/12/north-carolina-becomes-second-state-mandate-technology-training-lawyers.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chalk Up Another State that Has Adopted the Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/10/chalk-another-state-adopted-duty-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/10/chalk-another-state-adopted-duty-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2018 12:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=28263</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/heads-in-the-sand169-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />Another state has adopted the ethical duty of technology competence for lawyers, bringing the total that have done so to 32. Related: Full list of states that have adopted the duty of technology competence. This week, the Vermont Supreme Court ordered amendments to the comments to Rule 1.1 of the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct. [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/10/chalk-another-state-adopted-duty-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tracking Adoption of Tech Competence Rule: A New Home for My List of States</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/06/tracking-adoption-tech-competence-rule-new-home-list-states.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/06/tracking-adoption-tech-competence-rule-new-home-list-states.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:58:58 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=27314</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<img width="707" height="397" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" decoding="async" loading="lazy" srcset="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9.jpg 707w, https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/heads-in-the-sand-16-9-300x168.jpg 300w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 707px) 100vw, 707px" />Since 2015, I have been tracking the states that have adopted the duty of technology competence for lawyers. I have been doing that by updating a now three-year-old blog post. The post has become messy and unwieldy. To clean it up, I&#8217;ve created a new page where I will continue to track adoption. The new [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/06/tracking-adoption-tech-competence-rule-new-home-list-states.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Second State Moves Closer to Mandating Technology Training for Lawyers</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/05/a-second-state-moves-closer-to-mandating-technology-training-for-lawyers.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/05/a-second-state-moves-closer-to-mandating-technology-training-for-lawyers.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2018 19:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CLE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=17677</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In 2016, Florida became the first state to mandate technology training for lawyers, when it adopted a rule requiring lawyers to complete three hours of CLE every three years &#8220;in approved technology programs.&#8221; So far, no other state has followed suit. But now one has moved a giant step closer to following in Florida&#8217;s footsteps. [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/05/a-second-state-moves-closer-to-mandating-technology-training-for-lawyers.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>I Missed One, So Now It&#8217;s 31 States That Have Adopted Ethical Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/missed-one-now-31-states-adopted-ethical-duty-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/missed-one-now-31-states-adopted-ethical-duty-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:00:35 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=17276</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[My post yesterday about Kentucky having adopted the duty of technology competence brought an email alerting me that Indiana had also adopted the duty, bringing the total to 31. The complete list of states that have adopted this duty can be found here. A hat tip to William C. Wagner, partner at Taft Stettinius &#38; [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/missed-one-now-31-states-adopted-ethical-duty-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Make That 30 States, As Another Adopts Ethical Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/make-30-states-another-adopts-ethical-duty-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/make-30-states-another-adopts-ethical-duty-technology-competence.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:38:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=17267</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Just a week ago, I reported on the 29th state to have adopted the duty of technology competence, as part of my ongoing tally of states, and now there is the 30th to add: Kentucky. The duty took effect on Jan. 1, 2018, having been adopted by the Supreme Court of Kentucky on Nov. 15, 2017 [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/make-30-states-another-adopts-ethical-duty-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another State Adopts Duty of Technology Competence; Total Now at 29</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-total-now-29.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-total-now-29.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2018 13:39:51 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=17224</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As I continue my effort to keep a tally of the states that have adopted the duty of technology competence. I&#8217;ve just learned, belatedly, of another. On Sept. 26, 2017, the Supreme Court of Missouri adopted the amendment.  It amends Rule 4-1.1 of Missouri&#8217;s Rules of Professional Conduct by revising Comment 6, Maintaining Competence, to be in accord with ABA [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2018/03/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-total-now-29.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Does A Lawyer Get and Stay Competent in Technology?</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/11/lawyer-get-stay-competent-technology.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/11/lawyer-get-stay-competent-technology.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=16601</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve written any number of posts about the duty of technology competence under ABA Model Rule 1.1, Comment 8, and I&#8217;ve been tracking its adoption by the states. But one aspect of this duty that does not get as much attention is how lawyers can get and remain technologically competent. There have been several developments on this [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/11/lawyer-get-stay-competent-technology.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another State Adopts Duty of Technology Competence, Bringing Total to 28</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/09/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-bringing-total-28.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/09/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-bringing-total-28.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2017 12:27:35 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.lawnext.com/?p=16132</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In my continuing effort to keep a tally of the states that have adopted the duty of technology competence, I&#8217;ve discovered another, Nebraska, which brings the total to 28 states. The Nebraska Supreme Court adopted the amendment on June 28, 2017.  It amends comment 6 to Nebraska Rule of Professional Conduct § 3-501.1 &#8212; the corollary [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/09/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-bringing-total-28.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Presentation: Ethical Dangers of Technology in the Legal Practice</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/05/presentation-ethical-dangers-technology-legal-practice.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/05/presentation-ethical-dangers-technology-legal-practice.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2017 15:22:43 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=15542</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[During the past week, I&#8217;ve had the great honor and pleasure of presenting a four-hour program on legal ethics and technology to members of the Solo &#38; Small Firm Section of the Florida Bar. What made this program particularly special was that it took place during a 10-day cruise along the Danube River, from Vilshofen, [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/05/presentation-ethical-dangers-technology-legal-practice.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>ABA Issues Major Ruling on Ethics of Email and Electronic Communications</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/05/aba-issues-major-ruling-ethics-email-electronic-communications.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/05/aba-issues-major-ruling-ethics-email-electronic-communications.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2017 12:30:24 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=15298</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The American Bar Association&#8217;s Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility has issued a major new opinion providing guidance on the steps lawyers should take to protect client confidentiality in electronic communications. The new opinion, Formal Opinion 477 (embedded copy below), updates Formal Opinion 99-413, issued in 1999, to reflect changes in the digital landscape as [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/05/aba-issues-major-ruling-ethics-email-electronic-communications.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another State Adopts Duty of Technology Competence &#8212; and Canada May Also</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/03/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-canada-may-also.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/03/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-canada-may-also.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2017 14:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=14708</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Add Tennessee to the list of states that have adopted the duty of technology competence, bringing the total to 27 states. And keep an eye on our neighbors to the north &#8212; Canada may be on its way to adopting a parallel duty. (See the full tally of states here.) In Tennessee, the Supreme Court [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2017/03/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-canada-may-also.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another State Adopts Duty of Technology Competence; Makes it 26</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/12/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-makes-26.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/12/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-makes-26.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2016 13:39:59 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=14152</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As this blog continues to follow the states that adopt the duty of technology competence for lawyers, there is another to add: Colorado. That brings to 26 the number of states that have adopted some version of Comment 8 to ABA Model Rule 1.1. Actually, Colorado adopted the rule last April. I missed that one [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/12/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-makes-26.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Florida Is 25th State to Adopt Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/09/florida-25th-state-adopt-duty-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/09/florida-25th-state-adopt-duty-technology-competence.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2016 13:15:02 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=13589</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Just last week, I reported that Oklahoma had adopted the duty of technology competence  for lawyers, becoming the 24th state on my ongoing tally of states that have adopted the ABA Model Rule. Now there is another. Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered adoption of the duty of tech competence for that state, effective [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/09/florida-25th-state-adopt-duty-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another State Adopts Duty Of Tech Competence &#8212; This Time With A Twist</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/09/another-state-adopts-duty-tech-competence-time-twist.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/09/another-state-adopts-duty-tech-competence-time-twist.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:40:52 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=13495</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Oklahoma this week became the latest state to adopt the duty of technology competence for lawyers. According to my ongoing tally, that brings the number of states that have adopted the duty to 24. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma adopted the change on Monday, to be effective immediately, in an order amending several of the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/09/another-state-adopts-duty-tech-competence-time-twist.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another Two States Adopt Ethical Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/07/another-two-states-adopt-duty-technology-competence-2.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/07/another-two-states-adopt-duty-technology-competence-2.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 18:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=13196</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As I continue to track the states that have adopted the ethical duty of technology competence, I have two more to add, bringing the total to 23. Last week, Wisconsin became the latest state to adopt the duty, which will take effect on Jan. 1, 2017. On July 21, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin adopted [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/07/another-two-states-adopt-duty-technology-competence-2.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>On Legal Ethics and the Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/07/legal-ethics-duty-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/07/legal-ethics-duty-technology-competence.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2016 12:00:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=13106</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Many lawyers understand that a lack of competence in technology puts them at a competitive disadvantage. But do you also realize that it puts you at risk of ethical sanctions or malpractice? In my column this week at Above the Law, I discuss this evolving ethical duty of technology competence for lawyers and what it [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/07/legal-ethics-duty-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another State Adopts the Duty of Technology Competence for Lawyers</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/06/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-lawyers.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/06/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-lawyers.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:50:37 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=12887</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I have been tracking here the states that have adopted the ethical duty of technology competence for lawyers. I have just learned of one more state that has adopted the duty. That brings the total number of states to 21. The latest state is North Dakota, where the Supreme Court ordered adoption effective March 1, [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2016/06/another-state-adopts-duty-technology-competence-lawyers.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Add Two More States To Those That Have Adopted Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/12/another-two-states-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/12/another-two-states-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 20:47:22 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=11719</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In my continuing effort to track states that have adopted the ethical duty of technology competence for lawyers, I have two more to add, one that adopted it recently and one that I missed from earlier this year: Iowa adopted the rule on Oct. 15, 2015, effective immediately. Here is the rule and here is the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/12/another-two-states-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Illinois Adopts Duty of Technology Competence; Is Now 15th State To Do So</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/10/illinois-adopts-duty-of-technology-competence-is-now-15th-state-to-do-so.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/10/illinois-adopts-duty-of-technology-competence-is-now-15th-state-to-do-so.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2015 21:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=11484</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court of Illinois yesterday adopted the ethical duty of technology competence, making it the 15th state (by my count) to have adopted the 2012 amendment to the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The Illinois change mirrors the Model Rule and amends Comment 8 to Rule 1.1, Competence, to read (changed text is underlined): [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/10/illinois-adopts-duty-of-technology-competence-is-now-15th-state-to-do-so.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Duty To Be Competent in E-Discovery? California Says Yes</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/08/a-duty-to-be-competent-in-e-discovery-california-says-yes.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/08/a-duty-to-be-competent-in-e-discovery-california-says-yes.html#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2015 14:45:58 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=11170</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Ever since 2012, when the American Bar Association amended the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to say that lawyers have a duty to be competent in technology, there has been debate over just how far that duty extends. In a decision that could be a harbinger of how other states will rule, the State Bar [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/08/a-duty-to-be-competent-in-e-discovery-california-says-yes.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mass. Becomes 14th State to Adopt Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/03/mass-becomes-14th-state-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/03/mass-becomes-14th-state-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2015 20:11:13 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=10624</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I wrote recently that 13 states (see full list) had adopted the ethical duty of technology competence reflected in 2012 amendments to the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Well, make it 14. Today, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ordered the adoption of Comment 8 to Rule 1.1, which will now read as follows [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/03/mass-becomes-14th-state-to-adopt-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>13 15 17 18 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 States Have Adopted Ethical Duty of Technology Competence</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/03/11-states-have-adopted-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/03/11-states-have-adopted-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:46:56 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=10553</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Important note: I have moved this list to a new page. This page is no longer being updated. For the up-to-date list, please see the new page.  [Update 3/15/18: Indiana adopted the rule, so the total is now 31.] [Update 3/14/18: Kentucky adopts the rule, bringing total to 30.] [Update 3/5/18: Adoption by Missouri brings [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/03/11-states-have-adopted-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>68</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Do Lawyers Have An Ethical Duty To Be Competent in E-Discovery?</title>
		<link>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/02/lawyers-ethical-duty-competent-e-discovery.html</link>
					<comments>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/02/lawyers-ethical-duty-competent-e-discovery.html#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Ambrogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2015 15:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Competence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal ethics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawnext.com/?p=10468</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It was big news in 2012 when the American Bar Association amended the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to make clear that lawyers have a duty to be competent in technology. Specifically, the ABA amended the comment to Model Rule 1.1, governing lawyer competence, to say that, in addition to keeping abreast of changes in the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.lawnext.com/2015/02/lawyers-ethical-duty-competent-e-discovery.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
