Professional Responsibility Flashcards
Definitions
Belief
“Belief” or “believes” denotes that the person involved actually supposed the fact in question to be true.
A person’s belief may be inferred from circumstances.
Definitions
Informed Consent
- agreement by a client to a proposed course of conduct after the lawyer has communicated adequate information and explanation about the material risks of and reasonably available alternatives to the course of conduct
Requires
* adequate disclosure
* Consent
How it typically comes In a exam
- Where the lawyer simply does not provide any kind of opportunity
I recommend this, let us take it
No comms
No weighing of costs and benefits
Be aware of inadequacy of facts as well
Definitions
Knowing, Known, or Knows
denotes actual knowledge of the fact in question.
A person’s knowledge may be inferred from circumstances.
Definitions
Tribunal
Usually a court
* Key → binding legal judgment
* can be executive administration – look for binding
Definitions
Law Firm
Includes corporate law offices, in-house, district attorney offices, public defenders office
Facts and circumstances to look at
* Office sharing, fee sharing, etc.
* How do they present themselves to the public?
* Mutual access to information concerning the clients they serve?
Definitions
Confirmed in Writing
Denotes informed consent that is given in writing by the person or
a writing that a lawyer promptly transmits to the person confirming an oral informed consent.
if not feasible at time, a reasonable time thereafter
Example
* We talked today, and you said it is okay that i revealed to the opposing counsel this information because we think it will be strategically advantageous to do so
Email is enough
MR 8.5
Jurisdiction
An attorney is held to the standards of their Jurisdiction no matter where the lawyer’s conduct occurred. But can also be held to another Jurisdiction.
Example
* You’re a CA lawyer doing legal work in texas, and you do something unethical
* You can be sanctioned in CA where you’re admitted, in addition to TX
Violations of ethical rules
Violations of ethical rules can result in
Administrative sanctions
* Reprimand
* Suspension
* Disbarment
Civil liability
Criminal proceedings
or all of the above
When can Lawyers be disciplined?
Breaches of attorney ethics rules
Fraud
Criminal activity
Conduct that has nothing to do with the practice of law but reflects poorly on the attorney
MR 8.4(c)
* Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation . . .”
* Basically says when you do anything dishonest, even if it is not related to the practice of law, you can be disciplined in your state or the states in which you are a lawyer
Ex → Fraud, lying, drunk driving, felony convictions, major drug crime, leaving the scene of a fatal car accident, assault/domestic violence
State Rules of Ethical Conduct
The Supreme Court of each state typically adopts rules of professional conduct that apply to lawyers in its state.
The ABA Model Rules have profoundly influenced state rules.
Lawyers as Fiduciaries
We need to protect the client’s interests as if they were our own interests.
Once the Attorney-Client relationship is created, a lawyer becomes a fiduciary for their client
* Imposes civil liability and gives client independent basis to sue
MR 2.1
* in rendering advice, a lawyer may not refer ONLY to the law but to other considerations such as economic, social & political factors that may be relevant to the client’s situation
Vicarious Liability of Attorneys
Responsibilities of Partners, Managers, and Supervisory Lawyers
Partners or other lawyers with managerial authority should make sure all employees in the firm conform to the Rules
* must have a system in place to ensure compliance
* Reasonablility standard
Supervisory attorney become liable for violations of supervised attorneys/non-professionals if they:
* Order
* Ratify
* After learning of a violation, fail to take remedial action
An attorney should ensure that an associate is competent to conduct a trial on her own before giving them that responsibility
- Ratify = you know they will do it and you don’t do anything about it
Vicarious Liability of Attorneys
Responsibilities of a subordinate attorney
Just because your partner tells you to do something you cannot always rely on having protection!
No Nuremberg defense!
* A subordinate lawyer or staff person cannot defend by saying, “I was only following orders!”
When are you protected?
* If it is debatable, then you are protected. See R 5.2(b).
When are you not protected?
* If a reasonably prudent attorney would know what they are being asked to do is unethical or illegal, then you are responsible regardless of if you are being asked to do it
In other words, if they tell you to do something and at least there’s a reasonable argument that they’re telling you to do is ethical, then you have to follow your boss
The corollary
* if it is not reasonable and you do it anyway, your boss is liable and you’re liable
* “If the question can reasonably be answered only one way, the duty of both lawyers is clear and they are equally responsible for fulfilling it. ”
Vicarious Liability of Attorneys
Law students/non-lawyer liability under the model rules
Law students are not subject to the Model Rules, generally, but breach of the Model Rules potentially subjects their supervisors to ethical and civil law violations. (See Rule 5.3)
* Except 8.1 – disclosure rules when you apply to the bar –> dont lie to bar or hold back info
* Also you cannot practice law as a law student
What are the consequences for violating the rules
* You can be questioned, and the info can be used to decide whether to admit you to the bar or not
* Also civil liability
Reporting Misconduct by Other Lawyers
MUST report another lawyer who commits violation of the rules that substantially questions the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer
- You see an attorney doing dishonest bullshit, you have a duty to report it
Disclosure not required when:
* Confidential info 1.6
* approved lawyers’ assistance program (alcohol recovery program)
The term “substantial” refers to the seriousness of the possible offense and not the quantum of evidence of which the lawyer is aware.
The Attorney-Client Relationship
Formation of the Attorney-Client Relationship
“Would a reasonable client presume you were their lawyer?”
- Formation of the Attorney-Client relationship does NOT depend on payment or retention, rather, the court looks at the conduct of the attorney.
Focus on the client and what they reasonably believe!
Courts look at what you DID, not what you said.
* Actions speak louder than words so if a lawyer says not a lawyer but does all things a lawyer would do, then likely AC relationship
Very low bar, and creates a sort of “duty” that are elements to a lot of other rules
Formation of the Attorney-Client Relationship
Case: Perez → 20 dead children bus driver accident case
Case
While Perez is in the hospital, lawyers came to get a statement
* Perez alleges this establishes A/C relationship
Perez says they elicited a statement from him about the accident and that it should have been confidential
* But lawyers ended up giving the statement to the D.A.
So was there a A/C relation? Rule?
* If your actions and your words would lead a reasonable person to believe that you were their lawyer, then you were their lawyers
Thus, since Perez believed they were his attorneys and thus trusted them, an AC relationship was established.
Does not need to be a legal advice
No fee
No legal agreement
Formation of the Attorney-Client Relationship
Case: Westinghouse → Law firm does a confidential survey case
Case
The oil companies believed they had AC relationship because of the nature of the work they did with kirkland
* Confidential interviews
* Confidential surveys
A reasonable member of the trade org would believe that they were being represented
PROBLEM IS you can’t forget the confidential information you
know!
* You can’t unring the bell.
The whole question here is whether Kirkland is an attorney
of API?
* If there is no A-C relationship, there is no fiduciary duty kicked in, so then there would be no conflict/issue.
Appellate court said a reasonable API member would believe they were a client based on facts & circumstances.
Formation of the Attorney-Client Relationship
How can a lawyer protect themselves from forming an AC relationship?
If a lawyer should know or reasonably should know that the unrepresented person might misunderstand the lawyer’s role in the matter, then the lawyer needs to make reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding. (Rule 4.3)
* LAWYERS DUTY TO CLEAR THINGS UP
What could the lawyers have said in Perez?
* I am not your lawyer but i am here to request a statement
Diligence
Rule
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
- Lawyer should pursue matter despite opposition, obstruction, or personal inconvenience to him
- Yes, you have to be zealous, but at the same time, you are not obligated to press every advantage if you think it is fair, just, reasonable not to do so
- The lawyer’s duty to act with reasonable diligence does not require the use of offensive tactics or preclude the treating of all persons involved in the legal process with courtesy and respect. (Comment 1)
Lack of Diligence example:
* requesting 19 extensions to file a brief in a capital case with no reasonable excuse for failure to comply with court deadlines.
Competence
Rule
A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client.
* Competent representation = the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation
A lawyer may accept representation where the requisite level of competence can be achieved by reasonable preparation (comment 4)
A lawyer’s work load must be controlled so that each matter can be handled competently (comment 2)
Common causes of incompetence
* Inexperience
* Ignorance
* Neglect
* Lack of time
* High volume of matters
Competence doesn’t necessarily mean you have to know it now but also that you could or are able to learn it
Competence
Does this rule mean you can’t work in areas of the law you don’t know about?
No
* A lawyer need not necessarily have special training or prior experience to handle legal problems of a type with which the lawyer is unfamiliar. (comment 2)
A lawyer can accept legal work that requires knowledge of an area of law in which the lawyer has no experience, as long as the lawyer compensates for the inexperience through study or affiliation with another established lawyer (Comment 2)
Competence
Exception
In an emergency a lawyer may give advice or assistance in a matter in which the lawyer does not have the skill ordinarily required where referral to or consultation or association with another lawyer would be impractical. Even in an emergency, however, assistance should be limited to that reasonably necessary in the circumstances, for ill-considered action under emergency conditions can jeopardize the client’s interest.
Example
* your cousin calls you, you are a civil lawyer, he says he is arrested. No one else is available, I can help even if it is a little incompetent.
Limiting the Scope of Representation
A lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent
- If limiting the scope of the representation means the attorney cannot be adequately prepared for trial, it is not reasonable
Examples:
* Representation at a mediation
* In a negotiation of a legal matter, or
* For certain aspects of a complicated case.
Follow Client Objectives v. Means
Objectives
A lawyer shall abide by a client’s decisions concerning the objectives of representation
Objectives are decisions that affect the ultimate resolution of the case.
Example
* settlement, do I want to win
Follow Client Objectives v. Means
Means
Means shall be consulted, but a lawyer is not required to follow client’s advice
Means refer to decisions that are procedural or tactical
Examples
* cross examination
* granting favors for the otherside for something later (continuation)
* Means is basically your lawyer playbook
* Do I want to ask these questions, or do this another way.
Predominant rule in most jurisdictions → once you consult with the client, you can do what you want
* Our obligation is to only consult the client
Follow Client Objectives v. Means
Disagreement
The lawyer should also consult with the client and seek a mutually acceptable resolution of the disagreement.
* If such efforts are unavailing and the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement with the client, the lawyer may withdraw from the representation.
Whether to settle or not → always an objective (say you disagree)
* You can’t go against that
* But you can slow things down – go talk to people bro – you yourself can advise more etc and try to convince more
* Last thing you can do is Memorialize what you did
* Letter to client saying I advise against this move, you can more more, however you are the client and I will do what you want
Client Communication
A lawyer shall
- Promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance with respect to which the client’s informed consent is required of these rules.
- Reasonably consult with the clients about the means by which the client’s objectives are to be accomplished about the status of the matter.
- Keep client reasonably informed
- Promptly comply with reasonable requests for Information
- Consult with the client about any relevant limitation on the lawyer’s conduct when the lawyer knows that the client expects assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law
A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.
Example of Consult
* So if the client wants to do something that is illegal or fraudulent, you have to be able to draw those lines
Client Communication
Offers?
Civil or Criminal
When you get offers–criminal or civil–you, as a general rule, communicate it to the client
* Because of ends and means
* Client always has the authority to settle or not
unless the client has previously indicated that the proposal will be acceptable or unacceptable or has authorized the lawyer to accept or to reject the offer.
Example
* Criminal case → client says if you get any offer of misdemeanor, take it but if felony do not take it!
* If the prosecutor offers misdemeanor, you don’t have to go back to the client per this rule
* Why? Because you already got the authority
* But you probably should regardless
Client Communication
Witholding Information
In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication.
Example
* a lawyer might withhold a psychiatric diagnosis of a client when the examining psychiatrist indicates that disclosure would harm the client.
Client Communication
Explaining matters
The client should have sufficient information to participate intelligently in decisions concerning the objectives of representation and the means by which they are to be pursued, to the extent the client is willing and able to do so
Example
* when there is time to explain a proposal made in a negotiation, the lawyer should review all important provisions with the client before proceeding to an agreement.
* In litigation a lawyer should explain the general strategy and prospects of success and ordinarily should consult the client on tactics that are likely to result in significant expense or to injure or coerce others.
* On the other hand, a lawyer ordinarily will not be expected to describe trial or negotiation strategy in detail.
Client Communication
CA rule
slight exception
A lawyer may delay transmission of information to a client if the lawyer reasonably believes that the client would be likely to react in a way that may cause imminent harm to the client or others.
Assisting a Client in a Criminal or Fraudulent act
A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent
* but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and
* may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law.
Example
* Client comes to you and says, I want to put this money some place where it cannot be taxed → and I think I want to do it this way
* And I think – hey if you do it this way, you may come into some problems with tax law
* But if you do it this way and do these things–like saying money is for X or Y– then you can get a tax exemption
Basically sometimes you can explain the law in some way that is a guide for them to commit the fraud or criminal act
* As opposed to explaining a way to not commit the fraud or criminal act
* Your explanation can turn into a tacit approval or tacit instruction
Sexual Relations with Clients
General Rule
A lawyer shall not have sexual relations with a client unless a consensual sexual relationship existed between them when the client-lawyer relationship commenced
Sexual Relations with Clients
Policy
Sexual Relations is not defined. Go to the comments and see the policy.
The relationship between lawyer and client is a fiduciary one in which the lawyer occupies the highest position of trust and confidence.
* The relationship is almost always unequal; thus, a sexual relationship between lawyer and client can involve unfair exploitation of the lawyer’s fiduciary role
* ACP gets fucked too. When is it in effect and when is not? Muddies the water.
unfair exploitation of the lawyer’s fiduciary role
Example
* So if a girl does not want to fuck me, she might do it anyway because then maybe I wont represent her as well if she doesnt
What do you do in a situation where there is no physical touching?
* Can argue that all the same problems in a non-physical relationship between a lawyer and client are associated with physical sexual relationships.
Sexual Relations with Clients
CA Nuance
New rule is the same as ABA but includes a specific definition of sexual relations
* sexual relations requires the touching of an intimate part for arousal.
Harassment and Discrimination
Elements
Applies outside the bounds of the AC relationship?
- Conduct must be Knowing: “knows or reasonably should know.”
- Prohibits harassment OR Prohibits discrimination; AND
- On the basis of: Sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, or socioeconomic status; and
- Related to the practice of law
- knows = Knowing standard
- Reasonably should know = Objective standard → a lawyer of reasonable prudence and competence
Harassment and Discrimination
Lawyer engages in “conduct related to the practice of law.”
Related to the practice of the law. Defined by Comment 4 as:
* Representing clients
* Interacting with witnesses, co workers, court personnel, lawyers and others while engaged in the practice of law
* Operating or managing a law firm or law practice
* Participating in bar association, business or social
activities in connection with the practice of law (broad)
Very broad. Including social events.
* CA does not go this far.
Thoughts are NOT considered conduct
* There is debate if anything not listed is “related to the practice of law” because not in text
Harassment and Discrimination
Discriminatory or Harassment?
- Harassment includes “sexual harassment and derogatory or demeaning verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.”
- Discrimination includes “harmful verbal or physical conduct that manifests bias or prejudice towards others.”
Harassment and Discrimination
Important distinction between rejection based on STATUS of client vs. TYPE OF WORK
There will always be an issue if you are refusing due to the STATUS of the client.
- More gray area if it is the type of work – morally repugnant work under Rule 1.16 permissive withdrawal exceptions (i.e. drafting prenup for homosexual couple violates personal beliefs).
A lawyer is allowed the discretion to decide which clients to represent and how to craft their practice according to interests and aspirations AS LONG AS IT IS NOT DISCRIMINATORY
Harassment and Discrimination
Things to notice
Is it particularized?
* Focused on a specific person = more likely to violate
* He made an inference based on a person’s status that is protected under the rule
These can get tricky especially with 1.16
* But 1.16 does not allow you to discriminate
* You can reject a rapist movie mogul because you just do not like him and that is ok
* But if it is a protected class, you cannot
* Becomes fact based. Comes down to your reason and the circumstances
Interaction b/w 1.16 and 8.4g
* 8.4 (g) is subordinated to Rule 1.16 that addresses a lawyer’s ability to decline representation or withdraw from representation.
* Except as stated in paragraph 1.16 (c), “a lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if: the client insists upon taking action that the lawyer considers repugnant or with which the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement.”
Harassment and Discrimination
What if you wanted to help a protected class?
Still would be tricky. The rule is broad, it means that you cannot make those decisions based on protected classes
* Even though that person is trying to help and you can see the good intentions
Limit the scope of your representation to other variables rather than a protected class!
* represents homemakers seeking employment, for example
* If you wanted to do this, you would have to do it in a neutral way that did not run afoul of a protected class.
* They won’t get into your intent as long as things are neutral
You can set geographic boundaries for example
Harassment and Discrimination
CA version
In representing a client, or in terminating or refusing to accept the representation of any client, a lawyer shall not . . .
- MR rules is much broader including managing the law office, bar associations etc
CA also includes In relation to a law firm’s operations, a lawyer shall not . .
Professional Negligence
Elements
- The lawyer owed a duty to the client
- The lawyer failed to exercise “the competence and diligence normally exercised by lawyers in similar circumstances; and
- The breach of duty caused harm to the plaintiff.
Duty
* Only created if there is an AC relationship formed
Breach
* Most jurisdictions permit proof of breach of attorney ethics rules as evidence of breach of duty of care
Causation
* Lawyer’s breach caused P harm.
* But for D’s Conduct, P would have won (case within a case)
* Expert needed unless layperson can determine
Professional Negligence
Case: Togstad → wife goes and talks to a lawyer… what can go wrong!
You have to prove the case-within-a-case (CAUSATION)
* In order to prove the negligence malpractice case, you have to prove the medical malpractice case
* Because if she never would have won anyway then we have something similar to “harmless error”
* First is was the doc negligent, then was the lawyer negligent, then we win
What did miller do wrong? (BREACH)
* He rendered an opinion without doing the minimum due diligence
* He did not inform the client of the 2 year statute of limitations
What professional standard does the court hold miller to?
* Must conduct himself as “ordinarily prudent attorney”
* Lawyers owe clients “the competence and diligence normally exercised by lawyers in similar circumstances”
see facts in outline.
What should have he said to avoid this mess?
* We are not interested in this case but you should look at the statute of limitations and see another lawyer. Write this out.
* Don’t even tell her if she has a case or not
* Don’t give advice, you’re adding a little bit of risk
Termination of AC Relationship
R 1.16 = 4 subsections
Section A is when you MUST withdraw
Section B is when you MAY withdraw
Section C regardless of whether you meet A or B scenarios
* If the court says you can withdraw, you can withdraw
Section D
* You have to cooperate with a client to help them to get their file, to give them time to go get a new lawyer
* Exiting lawyer must take reasonable steps to keep client going
Termination of AC Relationship
Must withdraw
- The representation is certain to violate rules of professional conduct
- Lawyers physical or mental condition materially impairs the lawyers ability to represent the client;
- Lawyer is discharged (fired by client).
- the client or prospective client seeks to use or persists in using the lawyer’s services to commit or further a crime or fraud, despite the lawyer’s discussion regarding the limitations on the lawyer assisting with the proposed conduct.
Twist with discharge
* if you are in litigation conduct, each jurisdiction has a rule about when you can withdraw without court permission.
* Once the trial date has been set for litigation, even if you are fired you still have to ask the court to withdraw. Why? → the court has its own interest in its own calendar.
Termination of AC Relationship
May Withdraw
7 things
No material adverse effect on the interest of the client
* You don’t want to do this anymore and it won’t impact the client
Client persists in a course of action involving the lawyer’s services that the lawyer reasonably believes is criminal or fraudulent
* different from mandatory #2 because you suspect, you don’t know for sure
Client has used lawyer’s services to penetrate a crime or fraud
* It’s all done, you just learned the client used your services to commit a fraud
Repugnant or moral disagreement (broad)
* We don’t want lawyers and clients together if they are not on the same page
* This CANNOT be used for discrimination
Client doesn’t fulfill or substantially fulfill obligations
* Can’t do your job if the client doesn’t fulfill obligations
* meeting for information/depositions, paying bills
Unreasonable financial burden
Other good cause for withdrawal (basically, anything else; catch-all)
Moral Disagreement example
* I do not service gay couples because I don’t believe in gay union vs. gay adoption (harder)
Example (b)(1)
* You have too much work and you’re tired and if you don’t materially adverse the client, then you can
Termination of AC Relationship
Court
A lawyer must comply with applicable law requiring notice to or permission of a tribunal when terminating a representation. When ordered to do so by a tribunal, a lawyer shall continue representation in spite of good cause for terminating the representation.
* Litigation only
* Even with good cause, judge can still keep you on it
* even if subsection (a) or (b)
Termination of AC Relationship
Termination by drift
Episodic clients → where there is a pattern of client use of the lawyer’s services which leads the client to believe that the law firm still represents it.
* If a lawyer has served a client over a substantial period in a variety of matters, the client sometimes may assume that the lawyer will continue to serve on a continuing basis unless the lawyer gives notice of withdrawal.
* so they will remain clients
how to cure?
* Retainer agreements can state that a client is no longer a client b/w matters.
* You can help manage expectations by how you write your retainer and termination agreements.
Termination of AC Relationship
Differences between (must/crime/a4) and (may/reasonable belief crime/b2) and (may/past crime/b3)
Compare (b)(2) to (a)(4)
* Basically you know crime or fraud is ABOUT to happen you MUST withdraw
* In B you have REASON TO BELIEVE IT MAY HAPPEN thus you MAY withdraw
* small difference between know or reasonable believes
(b)(3) to (a)(4)
* Client has used your services to commit crime or fraud
* Its done, you can’t do anything about it anymore
* You can terminate your relationship because you know they did something bad last year using you but you do not have to
* This is about the past
* (a)(4) is present and future
Confidentiality
Most basic principle and form of the rule
MR 1.6
Keep client secrets, keep client confidences
Subsection (a)
* Shall not reveal unless
Subsection (b)
* may reveal to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary 1-7
Subsection (c)
* reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure
Policy reasons for this?
* No chilling effect b.w lawyers and clients
Confidentiality
Main Rule
A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless
* the client gives informed consent,
* the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or
* the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b)
Confidentiality
Relating to the representation?
Very broad category; scope:
* Personal information the client would not want revealed
From any source:
* You learned from the witness, docs, video surveillance
* If you’re working on the case → in any way related to the case, and it is something the client would want to keep secret, you gotta keep it that way
Overall → Confidentiality applies to anything related to representation from any source
* Way wider scope than ACP and WPP