Category: Legal Ethics

Reluctant Victim Becomes Avid Counsel

By Gary Schons

LAWYER and MATE, domestic partners, are at home and get into a terrible argument over finances. MATE becomes uncharacteristically angry and upset and grabs LAWYER around the neck and chokes LAWYER to the point of near unconsciousness. MATE releases LAWYER and backs way, crying in sorrow. LAWYER regains full consciousness, grabs a cellphone and calls 9-1-1 to report the domestic violence incident and summon the police. The police arrive a few minutes later, are admitted to the home by LAWYER, who then reports the incident to them. As required by law, the police immediately place MATE under arrest, handcuff MATE and lead MATE to the squad car for the ride to jail. Seeing this process upsets LAWYER who realizes the profound consequences on MATE of having called the police and setting a likely criminal prosecution in motion. LAWYER, who has practiced some criminal defense, drives to the jail, provides LAWYER’S State Bar Card to the DESK OFFICER and advises DESK OFFICER that LAWYER is representing MATE and wants to speak with MATE before the police do. LAWYER is placed in an “attorney visiting room” with MATE, just after completion of the booking process, where LAWYER tells MATE to invoke his right to silence and to the presence of a lawyer and not talk to the police or the prosecutor, and that LAWYER will arrange MATE’s release. MATE acknowledges the advice and is led away to holding area where the court has arranged for expedited initial appearances by video for minor offenses of arrest. LAWYER arranges to appear by video with MATE and succeeds in obtaining MATE’s immediate release on MATE’s own recognizance from the magistrate. Read More

Ethical Teachings from the Cosby Case

By Michael L. Crowley

On June 30, 2021, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the sexual assault convictions of comedian-actor Bill Cosby, and he was released from prison. He was serving a 10-year sentence. News accounts often referred to the reversal as one involving a “legal technicality”. But, in fact, the decision was based on one of the United States most cherished right, that is, the right to remain silent in the face of criminal prosecution. The case provides some important ethical considerations for both criminal and civil practitioners. Read More

False Speech — Interim License Suspension: A Word to the Wise Should Be Sufficient

On June 24, 2021, a New York court immediately suspended Rudi Giuliani’s law license, based on “uncontroverted evidence that [he] communicated demonstrable false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020.”

Recent Decision Rejecting Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Shows Consequences of Attorneys’ Lack of Candor to Court and Public

Despite the unprecedented events occurring since, many of us still remember March 2019 when it was made public that “Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III delivered his Report of the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election to the then-Attorney General of the United States, William P. Barr.”

The Criticism Surrounding ABA Amended Model Rule 8.4

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.”