Careful, judges on-line

United States Law Week has this bit of advice:

LAWYERS' LISTSERV POSTINGS SHOULD OMIT IDENTIFYING DETAILS ABOUT CLIENTS' CASES
(74 U.S.L.W. 2131, for those of you with access or a subscription)

It takes off from a formal opinion from the Los Angeles County Bar Association Professional Responsibility and Ethics Committee,
ETHICAL ISSUES INVOLVING LAWYER AND JUDICIAL PARTICIPATION IN LISTSERV COMMUNICATIONS:

QUESTIONS PRESENTED: Do lawyers participating in e-mail communications with a Listserv or “chat room” risk engaging in improper ex parte communications if judges in front of whom the lawyers may appear also have access to that same information? If a judge on the Listserv encounters a communication pertinent to a case in which he or she is presiding, do the Listserv communications constitute improper ex parte communications with the judge? What are the obligations and duties of a judge who receives a communication pertinent to a pending case? Do Listserv communications create special issues regarding lawyer’s duties of confidentiality?

Click through for the thrilling answers, and stay tuned for the coming sequel, ETHICAL ISSUES INVOLVING LAWYER BLOGS.

("Well I never!" "Oh, yeah, there was that one time when my trial judge read my post about our most-recent trial...")