Executive Director’s Message by Karen A. Gould The Year in Review: FY2014–2015 A CTIVE MEMBERSHIP in the Virginia State Bar declined in FY2015 from 31,752 attorneys the previous year to 31,260 as of June 30, 2015. The term “active” is defined by the rules as those attorneys who can practice law in Virginia. Overall membership in the VSB increased from 48,628 to 49,580. These numbers include corporate counsel admittees, corporate counsel registrants, associate members, judges (active and retired), and people who are retired or disabled. The VSB conducted its first elec-tronic election during the three-way president-elect contest in the fall of 2014. A study group of Council mem-bers was appointed in February 2015 to study the process and make recom-mendations to improve it. The full text of the report, its recommendations, and the VSB response can be found at http://www.vsb.org/docs/election -study-report-2015-05.pdf. VSB budget and dues increase effec-tive July 1, 2015 The Supreme Court of Virginia and the Council approved the VSB’s proposed FY2015-16 budget. By Court order dated September 1, 2014, effective July 1, 2015, bar dues were increased by $25 for active members and by $12.50 for associate members. In 2011, dues had been decreased from $250 to $225 for active members and $125 to $112.50 for associate members. Dues have not been increased since 2000. The previous 5 percent cut from expenditures was restored to the bud-get, with expenditures budgeted at $14.6 million. Included in the budget was a revenue/expense neutral Techshow, scheduled for April 2016 at the Richmond Convention Center. A $100 fee is to be charged to an expected 400 registrants to offset the $40,000 cost. New Rule of Professional Conduct 5.8, effective May 1, 2015 The new rule codifies a number of the suggestions from Virginia legal ethics opinions on departing lawyers’ obliga-tions into more concrete steps to fol-low. It does not change the Ethics Committee’s interpretation of a lawyer’s obligations in these circum-stances, but it does make clear that these are obligations, not suggestions, and establishes default rules for situa-tions where the lawyer and firm cannot agree on how to proceed, or when the client does not respond to the required notification. If the departing lawyer had pri-mary responsibility for a client’s mat-ter, that client should be given timely notice of the lawyer’s departure and advised of the options from which the client may choose. In the heat of an acrimonious law firm breakup or lawyer departure, the lawyers involved fight over and cannot agree on who — the departing lawyer or the law firm — should give the notice. Because of the significance of this issue, the frequency with which these issues are raised on the Ethics Hotline, and the acrimony that often accompa-nies a firm departure or dissolution, the Ethics Committee believed it would be helpful to have a Rule of Professional Conduct that explicitly dictates how and under what circum-stances clients must be notified, rather than relying exclusively on advisory opinions. New Rule 5.8 provides in full as follows: Rule 5.8 Procedures For Notification to Clients When a Lawyer Leaves a Law Firm or When a Law Firm Dissolves. (a) Absent a specific agreement other-wise: (1) Neither a lawyer who is leaving a law firm nor other lawyers in the firm shall unilaterally con-tact clients of the law firm for purposes of notifying them about the anticipated depar-ture or to solicit representation of the clients unless the lawyer and an authorized representa-tive of the law firm have con-ferred or attempted to confer and have been unable to agree on a joint communication to the clients concerning the lawyer leaving the law firm; and (2) A lawyer in a dissolving law firm shall not unilaterally con-tact clients of the law firm unless authorized members of the law firm have conferred or attempted to confer and have been unable to agree on a 10 VIRGINIA LAWYER | August 2015 | Vol. 64 www.vsb.org