Showing posts with label Professional Conduct. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Professional Conduct. Show all posts
Friday, January 24, 2020
THE RAT RULE
Since it is the Year of the Rat, this is from the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct and some legal writers have referred to this as the "Rat Rule"
"Rule 8.3: Reporting Professional Misconduct
Maintaining The Integrity of The Profession
(a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.
(b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.
(c) This Rule does not require disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6 or information gained by a lawyer or judge while participating in an approved lawyers assistance program.
Comment
[1] Self-regulation of the legal profession requires that members of the profession initiate disciplinary investigation when they know of a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Lawyers have a similar obligation with respect to judicial misconduct. An apparently isolated violation may indicate a pattern of misconduct that only a disciplinary investigation can uncover. Reporting a violation is especially important where the victim is unlikely to discover the offense.
[2] A report about misconduct is not required where it would involve violation of Rule 1.6. However, a lawyer should encourage a client to consent to disclosure where prosecution would not substantially prejudice the client's interests.
[3] If a lawyer were obliged to report every violation of the Rules, the failure to report any violation would itself be a professional offense. Such a requirement existed in many jurisdictions but proved to be unenforceable. This Rule limits the reporting obligation to those offenses that a self-regulating profession must vigorously endeavor to prevent. A measure of judgment is, therefore, required in complying with the provisions of this Rule. The term "substantial" refers to the seriousness of the possible offense and not the quantum of evidence of which the lawyer is aware. A report should be made to the bar disciplinary agency unless some other agency, such as a peer review agency, is more appropriate in the circumstances. Similar considerations apply to the reporting of judicial misconduct.
[4] The duty to report professional misconduct does not apply to a lawyer retained to represent a lawyer whose professional conduct is in question. Such a situation is governed by the Rules applicable to the client-lawyer relationship.
[5] Information about a lawyer's or judge's misconduct or fitness may be received by a lawyer in the course of that lawyer's participation in an approved lawyers or judges assistance program. In that circumstance, providing for an exception to the reporting requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Rule encourages lawyers and judges to seek treatment through such a program. Conversely, without such an exception, lawyers and judges may hesitate to seek assistance from these programs, which may then result in additional harm to their professional careers and additional injury to the welfare of clients and the public. These Rules do not otherwise address the confidentiality of information received by a lawyer or judge participating in an approved lawyers assistance program; such an obligation, however, may be imposed by the rules of the program or other law."
Friday, June 27, 2014
LAWYERS & JURORS & SOCIAL MEDIA
In the past few days, the press has been reporting on the fact that The American Bar Association says it's ethical for lawyers to scour online for publicly available musings of citizens called for jury service — and even jurors in deliberations.
This was actually from an opinion issued in April 2014 and here is a link to the full opinion:
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/formal_opinion_466_final_04_23_14.authcheckdam.pdf
This was actually from an opinion issued in April 2014 and here is a link to the full opinion:
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/formal_opinion_466_final_04_23_14.authcheckdam.pdf
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
REPLACING ZEALOUSNESS WITH CIVILITY
As the former United States Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said, "More civility and greater professionalism can only enhance the pleasure lawyers find in practice, increase the effectiveness of our system of justice, and improve the public’s perception of lawyers."
Yet it appears that there are clients and/or attorneys that still insist upon agressiveness. Anthony E. Davis, of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, authored the article "Replacing Zealousness With Civility," in the September 4, 2012 edition of The New York Law Journal and discussed reasons for preferring civility over zealousness from several perspectives.
Yet it appears that there are clients and/or attorneys that still insist upon agressiveness. Anthony E. Davis, of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, authored the article "Replacing Zealousness With Civility," in the September 4, 2012 edition of The New York Law Journal and discussed reasons for preferring civility over zealousness from several perspectives.
Labels:
Professional Conduct
Friday, December 4, 2009
SELF HELP - DEALING WITH SELF REPRESENTED
By clicking on the title above, you will view an article from the Law Society of Upper Canada but it deals with some of the issues attorneys faced when the other side is self-represented: however, I feel the advice given also applies to a lawyer dealing with another attorney and to the litigants themselves. In my experience, self represented clients often appear as Landlords in Landlord/Tenant court and in District Civil Court here in Nassau County, as well as small claims court. And of course, as mentioned last week on my Facebook page, you are aware of the self-represented parties in a Suffolk County mortgage foreclosure case who were able to get the action, and the mortgage, dismissed.
Labels:
Appearing Pro Se,
Professional Conduct
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



