The court’s decision in Falcon Brands, Inc. v. Mousavi & Lee, LLP, 2022 WL 246851 (Jan. 27, 2022) provides insight for all lawyers regarding when settlement demands “cross the line and become professional misconduct.”
By Timothy Casey
This issue of Ethics in Brief covers an attorney’s duty of confidentiality and a commonly held misconception regarding a “public records” exception to the duty of confidentiality. The misconception may stem from a conflation of the ethical duty of confidentiality with the evidentiary rule about the attorney-client privilege. In sum, there is no public records exception to the duty of confidentiality, although information revealed in a public record may not be privileged.
By Edward J. McIntyre
We tend to think of our obligations under the Rules of Professional Conduct as personal duties specific to our own conduct. And, indeed, the rules prescribe permissible conduct for California lawyers. Those obligations, however, stretch beyond what each of us may or must do and say.
By David C. Carr
A State Bar Court hearing judge filed her decision this week recommending the disbament of Thomas V. Girardi.
An opportunity suddenly appears: You’re a solo practitioner or in a small firm. You have the chance to join a larger firm — where the prospects appear brighter — or a chance to join another firm that better fits your practice. Before you leap, however, consider the ethical constraints that could haunt you and your future firm.
By Edward McIntyre
Many jurisdictions adopted a version of ABA Model Rule 1.14 to give guidance when lawyers must confront obligations to a client with diminished decision-making capacity. Our Rules Revision Commission submitted a proposed version of rule 1.14 to the Supreme Court that attempted to reconcile the Model Rule’s approach with unique California obligations, including our obligations of confidentiality.[1] The Court did not adopt proposed rule 1.14. The need for guidance, however, about ethical obligations to clients with diminished capacity remains. The State Bar’s Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct (COPRAC) stepped forward with a recent formal opinion.[2]
By Charles Berwanger
Lawyers are often put into the position of knowingly (or even unknowingly) receiving client direction to, for example, include in a contract an illegal provision. Too, lawyers are often directed to enforce such an illegal provision.
By Jessica Park and Andrew Servais
The California State Bar recently seized the client files of Efferin Deans, a man with a 25-year history of impersonating attorneys and two prior convictions of identity theft.[1] On Oct. 27, 2021, a criminal complaint was filed in Los Angeles County naming Efferin Deans and twenty-two aliases that Deans utilized to impersonate a lawyer and appear on the record as a licensed attorney for family law and personal injury cases from January 2019 to September 2021 (See People v. Deans, Los Angeles County Superior Court,Case No: BA499952).
One of the most rewarding aspects of an attorney’s job is providing pro bono services to those in need.[1] Though not required, lawyers are encouraged to provide pro bono legal services during their legal careers.[2] Pro bono work is also a great way for new attorneys to gain experience, develop new skills, and handle their own cases from start to finish.
By David C. Carr
Lawyers owe many ethical duties to their clients. Most of these duties are bottomed on the fiduciary nature of the attorney-client relationship. But lawyers also owe ethical duties to the judicial system and other persons arising from their status as officers of the Court and agents of the justice system. The most exciting (sometimes too exciting) problems in legal ethics arise from conflicting duty situations. California’s Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2.1 provides the context for many conflicting duty scenarios. It has been a part of ethical controversies since it became part of the black letter law of legal ethics on its adoption by the Supreme Court in November 2018.
