New rules for in-house counsel

(July 17, 2007) The agenda for the annual Judges of the Connecticut Superior Court meeting in June included the issues of in-house counsel and the unauthorized practice of law.

The judges voted to create a new section to the Superior Court Rules: Section 2-15A creates a new category of “Authorized House Counsel” by establishing a certification and registration requirement for lawyers admitted to practice in other states but not in Connecticut, if they are employed as lawyers for their companies in Connecticut.

In addition, the judges adopted recommendations from the rules committee of the Connecticut Superior Court regarding revisions to the Practice Book Rule 5.5, the unauthorized practice of law. The committee based its recommendation on the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

Proposed Rule 5.5 extends protections to in-house counsel who are not licensed to practice law in Connecticut but work here. Under the proposal, in-house counsel who are admitted and authorized to practice law in another U.S. jurisdiction cannot be deemed unauthorized to practice law in Connecticut if the employee is an “Authorized House Counsel.”

Section 2-15A requires unadmitted in-house counsel to apply to and be certified by the Connecticut Bar Examining Committee before they become an “Authorized House Counsel.” Among other things, applicants must be certified regarding their good moral character, be in good standing in the jurisdiction where they are licensed, and be employed in Connecticut.

Currently, the rules of the Superior Court do not offer protection against claims of unauthorized practice of law for in-house counsel who are not admitted to practice law in Connecticut.  The only protections given to in-house counsel who are not admitted to practice law in Connecticut is given by law through the legislature rather than through rule by the judicial branch.

It is time for Connecticut’s Superior Court rules to join those in nearly 80% of other states by requiring only that an in-house counsel be licensed in a U.S. jurisdiction.

Connecticut’s current rule contributes to the possibility that Connecticut will be viewed as inhospitable to interstate businesses. Moreover, large enterprises located here, particularly global ones, need the ability to obtain in-house legal services at the operational and headquarters levels within this state about issues that arise in other states or nations and have little or nothing to do with Connecticut law.

The proposed change to Rule 5.5 is important to Connecticut businesses because it provides them the geographic flexibility to recruit, develop and assign attorneys to meet global needs.

CBIA is pleased that the Superior Court judges adopted changes to Rule 5.5, the Unauthorized Practice of Law.

For more information, contact Kevin Hennessy at hennessk@cbia.com or 860-244-1900.