It is not uncommon for engineers to provide the contract forms for
public agencies. That should not be considered the UPL.
In order to address the other concerns, they could establish a 3 party
relationship where the Owner directly hires the attorney for proposes of
the A-C privilege, but the engineering firm pays the attorney's fees-
similar to insured/insurer relationship.
Stuart H Sakwa
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com http://www.arnstein.com
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.650.8484
Mobile: 954.261.9598
Fax: 561.802.3082
shsakwa@arnstein.com mailto:shsakwa@arnstein.com
http://legalnews.arnstein.com/ http://legalnews.arnstein.com/
Serving Clients for 120 Years
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Larry
Leiby
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 2:37 PM
To: Richard A. Burt; Construction Law Committee
(clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org)
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Engineer furnishing legal services
There used to be a segment on Saturday Night Live called "Bad Idea
Jeans.' That fits your scenario.
If you check with the Bar UPL committee you will find that this won't
work.
Your other concerns are also valid.
Larry R. Leiby, Esq.
Malka & Kravitz, P.A.
1300 Sawgrass Corp. Pkwy., Suite 100
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33323
Phone: 954-514-0984
Fax: 954-514-0985 e-mail: leiby@mkpalaw.com
Board Certified in Construction Law
Fla. Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court Civil Mediator
Member, Leiby Alexander Brandt ADR Group, LLC
Member, JAMS Global Engineering and Construction Panel
Fellow, College of Commercial Arbitrators
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of
Richard A. Burt
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 2:24 PM
To: Construction Law Committee (clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org)
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Engineer furnishing legal services
Everyone,
I represent an engineering firm which is a consultant to a water
authority ("owner"). The authority wants the engineering firm to (i)
include legal services (contract drafting and review) in its scope of
work (ii) hire an owner-designated attorney as a subconsultant to
perform these services. [I have asked why the owner can not look to the
owner's current attorney or hire its designated attorney directly to
perform these services; apparently there are political reasons for not
doing so.] It seems to me that the engineering firm will have problems
including legal services in its scope of work even though the legal
services are to be performed by an attorney under contract as a
subconsultant to the firm. Some possible problems:
- The engineer's professional liability insurance covers
engineering malpractice, not legal malpractice.
- The Board of Engineering and/or the Florida Bar may be critical
of an engineer who contracts to furnish legal services.
- There may be attorney-client communications problems or a
possible conflict of interest for the attorney.
Have you seen this scenario before? What do you think?
Your input will be much appreciated.
Dick Burt
Richard A. Burt, Esq.
BURT & BURT
220 So. Ridgewood Avenue
Suite 200
Daytona Beach, Florida 32114
(386) 252-2090 (office)
(866) 240-7043 (facsimile)
dick@burt-burt.com
www.burt-burt.com http://www.burt-burt.com/
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged information.
If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax
advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any
attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot
be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties
that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal
taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending
to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
It is not uncommon for engineers to provide the contract forms for
public agencies. That should not be considered the UPL.
In order to address the other concerns, they could establish a 3 party
relationship where the Owner directly hires the attorney for proposes of
the A-C privilege, but the engineering firm pays the attorney's fees-
similar to insured/insurer relationship.
Stuart H Sakwa
Attorney at Law
ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
www.arnstein.com <http://www.arnstein.com>
515 North Flagler Drive
Sixth Floor
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-4323
Phone: 561.650.8484
Mobile: 954.261.9598
Fax: 561.802.3082
shsakwa@arnstein.com <mailto:shsakwa@arnstein.com>
<http://legalnews.arnstein.com/> <http://legalnews.arnstein.com/>
Serving Clients for 120 Years
Offices in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Larry
Leiby
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 2:37 PM
To: Richard A. Burt; Construction Law Committee
(clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org)
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Engineer furnishing legal services
There used to be a segment on Saturday Night Live called "Bad Idea
Jeans.' That fits your scenario.
If you check with the Bar UPL committee you will find that this won't
work.
Your other concerns are also valid.
Larry R. Leiby, Esq.
Malka & Kravitz, P.A.
1300 Sawgrass Corp. Pkwy., Suite 100
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33323
Phone: 954-514-0984
Fax: 954-514-0985 e-mail: leiby@mkpalaw.com
Board Certified in Construction Law
Fla. Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court Civil Mediator
Member, Leiby Alexander Brandt ADR Group, LLC
Member, JAMS Global Engineering and Construction Panel
Fellow, College of Commercial Arbitrators
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
[mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of
Richard A. Burt
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 2:24 PM
To: Construction Law Committee (clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org)
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Engineer furnishing legal services
Everyone,
I represent an engineering firm which is a consultant to a water
authority ("owner"). The authority wants the engineering firm to (i)
include legal services (contract drafting and review) in its scope of
work (ii) hire an owner-designated attorney as a subconsultant to
perform these services. [I have asked why the owner can not look to the
owner's current attorney or hire its designated attorney directly to
perform these services; apparently there are political reasons for not
doing so.] It seems to me that the engineering firm will have problems
including legal services in its scope of work even though the legal
services are to be performed by an attorney under contract as a
subconsultant to the firm. Some possible problems:
* The engineer's professional liability insurance covers
engineering malpractice, not legal malpractice.
* The Board of Engineering and/or the Florida Bar may be critical
of an engineer who contracts to furnish legal services.
* There may be attorney-client communications problems or a
possible conflict of interest for the attorney.
Have you seen this scenario before? What do you think?
Your input will be much appreciated.
Dick Burt
Richard A. Burt, Esq.
BURT & BURT
220 So. Ridgewood Avenue
Suite 200
Daytona Beach, Florida 32114
(386) 252-2090 (office)
(866) 240-7043 (facsimile)
dick@burt-burt.com
www.burt-burt.com <http://www.burt-burt.com/>
This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or privileged information.
If you believe that you have received this message in error, please notify
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service guidance, be advised that any federal tax
advice contained in this written or electronic communication, including any
attachments or enclosures, is not intended or written to be used and it cannot
be used by any person or entity for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties
that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service or any other U.S. Federal
taxing authority or agency or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending
to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.