The quarterly publication of the International Legal Technology Association
Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/96072
Common Elements Across NBI Processes Law firms approach NBI in different ways. There are differences pertaining to personnel: • Some firms appoint full-time intake and conflicts committees composed of analysts and nonpracticing lawyers; • Some vest responsibility with practice group leaders or an individual general counsel; • And others distribute responsibility between individual lawyers and the finance department There are also differences pertaining to forms and workflow. Different practice groups require different information to vet clients, and many large firms have developed complex, proprietary forms to collect information about clients aimed to achieve business goals. Despite these differences, NBI processes share a few common elements designed to answer three baseline questions: Can we take on this client? A central task of any client evaluation portion of NBI is to check for conflicts of interest. Firms do this by generating and analyzing reports using electronic forms, including lists of firm clients, search technology to scan firm records and relational databases, or a manual method to scan paper-based information. The issues at stake regarding legal conflicts of interest vary across jurisdictions, and firms can choose to regulate conflicts by either declining matters where conflicts arise or by implementing information security controls to selectively prohibit and grant access to confidential information. Firms based in the U.S. must follow more stringent rules regarding imputation of conflicts across firms but have leeway to obtain waivers from former and current clients to sidestep potential conflicts. Firms based in the U.K. do not uphold such strict imputation rules (fee-earners must personally hold confidential information, only disclosing "material" information), but they also do not grant as much opportunity for obtaining client consent to waive conflicts. Firms must also analyze client information to identify risks of criminal activity that could jeopardize the firm. Like conflicts, regulations differ by jurisdiction. The principal compliance issue in the U.K. is money laundering, as regulated by the 2007 Money Legal Calendar and Docketing — Could it be that easy? Docket Enterprise provides a comprehensive calendar and docket solution that is ideally suited for both litigation and non-litigation practice areas. 56 Peer to Peer See just how easy it is. Contact