Risking getting slammed...but here's how an attorney explained it to me...
Conflict reports should only be run against a database of client names.  Noone cares if a party name who was once adverse to the firm shows up in a report as a former adverse party - mostly because they would have been properly represented by other counsel and because they were not a client of the firm's (therefore, that there is no conflict is a given as no confidential information was learned by the attorney/firm).  You can choose to enter as much information as you like in your database, but you don't have to use it all for a conflict search.  The only thing that matters is whether or not a current adverse party was once a client, so the only criteria for the search should be former and current client names.  You don't even have to be concerned about a once adverse party who now wants to be a client.  That is not a conflict...although that it may depend on the circumstances of the past case) - because then you want as much matter information as you can gather so the attorney can make an informed choice.

For us, conflict reports used to be run by inputting all involved party names and then coming up with any hit from any portion of the conflict software.  This was a particular pain to the attorneys who had to go through pages upon pages of irrelevant information.  We have since tweaked our reports so that they run searching all of the names submitted, but only reporting on the names coded as "client."

This issue is one that comes up again and again since it is a complicated issue.  We've even had to have training sessions for paralegals, secretaries and baby attorneys about what constitutes a conflict and how the search should be built, what names they should submit for searching and how our intake forms are structured so that we can run our conflicts (and not just at this firm, but others I've been a part of).  

I guess the long and short of my point is that instead of eliminating (or archiving) any information in the database, it would be better to refine the search parameters for a more concise report.

(I think I'm up to about 6 cents worth now...or maybe down to 1 cent...I'm not sure.)

Laura Steinberg
Records Manager
 
 
This message contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged. Unless you are the addressee, or authorized to receive e-mail for the addressee, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in this message or any attachment. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail, delete the message and any attachments, and destroy all hard copies of same. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Taylor, Scott
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 11:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Excluding Aged Closed Client Matters from Conflict Report

Let me clarify, we are not running a conflict report on matters.  We are running a search for every entity the attorney submits which includes the client name and all related parties (business or individual).  Our system will report on the following when there is a hit:

Client & Client Affiliate

Adverse & Adverse Affiliate

* Otherwise Involved and/or Matter Descriptions (Reflects files in which a name like the one searched appears in the matter name or as a party other than adverse).

Pending Searches (searches ran within 90 days in which the client/matter was not opened)

External Sources

Since the firm is over 100 years old, a search for a particular client could easily be over a couple of hundred pages.  As we started running into this, we began contacting the attorney and asking would they like a filter in order not to receive such a massive report which is what I believe Gary said he was doing.  It's these massive reports that made me curious as to what other firms were doing.  I spoke with my Loss Prevention Partner and agreed to get feedback from other firms before making any decisions.

Hope this will clarify.  Thanks to all of you for your valuable feedback.  Scott 






<http://mm1.lettermark.net/smithgambrellrussell/card/OIPC_3.map>
 Scott Taylor
Records Manager
(404) 815-3521
[log in to unmask]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/smithgambrellrussell/card/
OIPC_3.gif> 


-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Laura Steinberg
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 12:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Excluding Aged Closed Client Matters from Conflict Report

I apologize for my previous post if I offended you.  I didn't mean
anything like that at all and I realize now I misunderstood your
question.  But then, why are you running a conflict report on matters? I
run my conflicts on client names and only if I get a hit, then I
investigate the types and number of matters and include them on the
list.

Laura Steinberg
Records Manager


This message contains information which may be confidential and/or
legally privileged. Unless you are the addressee, or authorized to
receive e-mail for the addressee, you may not use, copy or disclose to
anyone this message or any information contained in this message or any
attachment. If you have received this message in error, please advise
the sender by reply e-mail, delete the message and any attachments, and
destroy all hard copies of same. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Taylor, Scott
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:49 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Excluding Aged Closed Client Matters from Conflict
Report

We do not filter client names and have no plans to filter client names
no matter how old.  My question was in regards to filtering "closed
matters" not "closed clients".  In our system, Elite and LegalKEY, a
client is never closed, only their matters.  Several large firms in
Atlanta filter their aged closed matters. I wanted to see what others
are doing.  

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance To unsubscribe
from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place
UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
[log in to unmask]




 IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.




Confidentiality Notice
This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer. It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]