Lawyer Raises Constitutional Question about Legal Process Outsourcing

[OhioChick]

June 2, 2008 at 10:53 am

I wrote last spring about India’s coming growth in knowledge process outsourcing, in particular in the area of legal outsourcing. As if to confirm the trend, Indian outsourcing giant Infosys Technologies launched a division devoted to legal process outsourcing in late 2007.

At least one attorney practicing in the U.S. took note of the trend and didn’t like what he saw. Now Maryland lawyer Joseph A. Hennessey wants a federal judge to decide whether offshoring legal work constitutes waiving attorney-client privilege and Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure, since the U.S. government can conduct surveillance of communications between U.S. residents and foreign nationals.

Bethesda-based Newman, McIntosh & Hennessey LLP, Hennessey’s employer, filed a complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, reports The Maryland Daily Record. The law firm also wants the ethics committees of the Maryland State Bar Association and the D.C. Bar to issue an opinion.

The MSBA has declined to do so, both because the matter is in litigation and because it involves “political issues that are really not the purview of the committee,” says the chairman of its ethics committee.

According to Hennessey’s complaint, offshoring legal work “would nullify the reasonable expectation of privacy that American citizens — litigating purely domestic disputes in U.S. Courts — would have in the documents that they produce in the course of civil litigation.”

President Bush and the Indian and American offices of Acumen, a legal outsourcing company that apparently pitched its services to Newman, McIntosh & Hennessey, are named as defendants in the complaint. Additional defendants include John and Jane Doe lawyers, whom the complaint defines as either competitors of Newman, McIntosh & Hennessey or opposing counsel. Hennessey said he wants to know whether opposing counsel would need to obtain his consent before outsourcing data that could be intercepted by the U.S. government and shared with its allies.

http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/sts/?p=384

[liberalhistorian]

1. As a paralegal, this really pisses me off.

I would think that legal outsourcing would give rise to a whole range of thorny issues, some of which are being raised in this lawsuit. It's not the same as outsourcing computer/IT work or call center work, not at all. And I believe the same issues, although in slightly different form, would apply to medical outsourcing as well. I know that outsourcing radiology is a growing, and worrisome trend.

[ChromeFoundry]

3. It may not be the EXACT same thing as IT outsourcing...

but at the end of the day, the net result is the same damn thing. You lose your job. Your personal information is in foreign hands and unprotected by US laws. IT, legal, medical, call-center outsourcing is in fact the same thing as all the manufacturing jobs that left this country. The middle class shrinks, poverty increases, and the wealth remain small and more powerful.

I don't quite understand why you make the directed parallel that this is different than other forms of outsourcing. Is it because this now affects the career path you have chosen? Is your job more important than the person that use to puts bolts into the drive train of a car? Is your families well-being worth more than the ex-call center operator's family? Or is the legal information of your companies clients more important that the credit, investment, taxation and banking information that is processed by the code I write?

Could you please clear up your comment on why paralegal work is so different than all the other work that has left this country? Thanks.

[liberalhistorian]

5. Let me clarify, for both you and the other poster

who misunderstood me. I have always been against any form of outsourcing, I don't care what field it is and I've spoken out against it many times. I've been called a "racist" for doing so, but I'm not against the foreign worker at all, I'm against the American companies who are doing it just for the sake of the almighty dollar, and taking jobs away from Americans.

What I meant when I said this was "different", was that legal information is, or at least is supposed to be, strictly confidential and that each legal case has very sensitive information that, if not protected, could be disastrous for the case and the parties involved. There are very strict professional rules and state and federal legal statues regarding confidentiality that would be very easy to break under outsourcing. That is the main issue that this lawsuit is attempting to address.

I didn't mean that it was any more disastrous for those in the legal field than in any other field that's been ravaged by outsourcing.

[OhioChick]

6. I somewhat understand what you're trying to say

However, don't agree fully. I understand that legal information is confidential and sensitive, but so is one's information that I stated in post #4.

SS#, credit info., banking info., medical info., (Just to name a few) are "just" as sensitive for U.S. citizens. We have HIPAA laws here to keep your medical information confidential. Now, do you think that other countries enforce that? Doubt it. I wouldn't be surprised to eventually hear of overseas companies gathering/selling the information to U.S. health care companies.....so that they can deny more citizens coverage given their health care status.

There should be strict professional rules on outsourcing of "any" sensitive information whether it's on behalf of a large U.S. Corporation or your "average joe" U.S. citizen.

[ChromeFoundry]

7. Thanks for clearing up your statement

However I do somewhat disagree with your views on legal information and strict confidentiality. Medical and financial both have similar ramifications when fallen into the wrong hands. How difficult would it be for you to get a job, obtain health coverage or get life insurance if your entire families medical history was available for $9.99 via a web based form on the Internet? I understand why you would think that legal information is so important... it's your area of expertise. But I feel that you need to look at the larger picture. My career is in many different disciplines under the IT umbrella, I've worked for banks, law firms, retail, government, military, financial, communication and manufacturing. All information has value, more than you are seeing right now. Two small pieces of information that you feel is insignificant, always lead to 30 or more pieces of information that you surely would not want floating around out on the Internet. Each of those 30, lead to hundreds more key pieced. Of course, any lawsuits you are involved in would surely be a key in digging up tons of additional information on you. It's all relative.

Thanks again, for posting back and clearing up your previous statement.

[OhioChick]

4. "It's not the same as outsourcing computer/IT work or call center work, not at all. "

BS it's not the same....

Funny how views change as the tide turns.

As for it "not being the same" it sure is. YOUR personal information (SS#, credit info., banking info., medical info., etc. is being sent around the globe......as well as U.S. jobs being lost in the process.)

BTW....Welcome to Globalization where no job is safe. How's it feel....IT has been feeling it for YEARS.

[robinlynne]

2. ahh, I see outsourcing the rest of us is ok?

[no_hypocrisy]

8. Is Prepaid Legal out of India, so to speak?

http://www.prepaidlegal.com/

[OhioChick]

9. American company.....not sure if they offshore their work, though...

"Pre-Paid Legal made the Forbes list of the 200 Best Small Companies in America again."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Paid_Legal_Services%2C_Inc.