Navigating the Duty of Candor on Appeal
It is no secret that trial attorneys must navigate ethical minefields as they collect information from their clients, as they engage in discovery, and as they present evidence to judges and juries.
It is no secret that trial attorneys must navigate ethical minefields as they collect information from their clients, as they engage in discovery, and as they present evidence to judges and juries.
Sparking intense controversy, in 2016 the American Bar Association (“ABA”) amended Model Rule 8.4 to add paragraph (g), making it professional misconduct to “engage in conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is harassment or discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status or socioeconomic status in conduct related to the practice of law.”
No matter which side you practice, a career in criminal justice is a call to public service and an important function of our great democracy. Despite uncertainties you may have about your future, I advise you to fearlessly go forth and take that first step.
The American Bar Association reported in October 2019 that 26% of law firms had experienced security breaches.
Some lawyers face State Bar discipline because of deliberate misconduct; others, because stupid misconduct put them there.
It goes without saying that an attorney has an ethical obligation to be truthful to the court, but where is the line between persuasive argument and an ethical violation?
“The pandemic forced many of us
to do telemedicine for reasons other than emergency care. We also have patient privacy and confidentiality obligations. We have to be just as cautious.”
Rules 1.9(a) and 1.18(c) address conflicts involving representing a current client with interests that are ‘materially adverse’ to the interests of a former client or prospective client on the same or a substantially related matter.
In this edition of the Ethics Column from San Diego Lawyer, attorney Macbeth guides us through the lawyer-witness rule.
Next time a colleague asks you for a courtesy extension of some deadline, remember, the decision is most likely yours, not your client’s.