What is the scope of representation permissible under pro hac vice admission authorizing representation of an organizational defendant? Can such counsel also represent current and former employees of the company?
In the past weeks, the Attorneys General of several states, repaired to the courts to challenge (and defend) the presidential election results. Were there ethical constraints on them?
One purpose of the advocate-witness rule is to prevent factfinder confusion: is an advocate-witness’s statement to be considered proof or argument?
The attorney-client privilege protects against compelled disclosure of confidential communication between an attorney and her client. The Evidence Code takes this protection a step further by prohibiting attorneys and judges alike from drawing negative inferences from the invocation of the privilege.
Whether a newer or experienced lawyer, it may appropriate to seek guidance concerning one’s ethical and other obligations to clients.
Ethical considerations place restrictions on what lawyers can and cannot communicate in a demand letter. This article will examine some of the ethical considerations specified in California Rule of Professional Conduct, 4.1 (Truthfulness to Others).
Ethical rules, statutes and case law prescribe and proscribe the conduct of California lawyers. In a recent decision, the Court of Appeal, Second District, interpreted the attorney-witness rule and concluded it applies not only at trial but also in the context of pretrial activities.
Division 3 of the Fourth District Court of Appeal made headlines in February 2019 with its decision in Martinez v. O’Hara (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 853
California lawyers must redouble their efforts to comply with and discharge their ethical duties to each other and the public by avoiding conduct that violates Rule 8.4.1.
Do two felony convictions, one for assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury and the other for discharging a firearm with gross negligence, involve moral turpitude?