Tag: #ethicsinbrief

Categories : Legal EthicsTags :

Rule 1.2.1: Hired Guns Or Client Gatekeepers?

On By sdcountybar

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. Read More

Categories : Legal EthicsTags :

Pick the Wrong Test, Be Held in Contempt

On By sdcountybar

By Edward McIntyre

A Central District of California grand jury issued subpoenas to a company and its lawyers related to a criminal investigation of the company’s owner, also a client of the lawyers. The subpoenas sought documents and communications related to that criminal investigation, the target of which was the company’s owner. The company and the lawyers produced some documents, but withheld others based on assertions of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine. Prosecutors pressed the issue. The district court (Hon. John Kronstadt) determined that the withheld documents were not protected by any privilege or were discoverable under the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege. The company and the law firm disagreed with the court’s rulings and continued to withhold the disputed documents. The court then held the lawyers and the company in contempt because they failed to comply with grand jury subpoenas.  Read More

Categories : Legal EthicsTags :

Release of The “Pandora Papers” is a Good Reminder of Attorney Duties Where There is a High Probability a Client is Seeking Advice to Commit a Crime

On By sdcountybar

By Andrew A. Servais

With the recent release of the “Pandora Papers,” renewed attention is focused on corporate ownership transparency. The so-called Pandora Papers release from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) has outlined the elaborate mechanisms that the wealthy deploy to shift funds between global jurisdictions, masking their true wealth and minimizing their tax obligations while also unmasking the U.S. as a tax haven — including the state of South Dakota with its proliferation of “dynasty trusts.” Read More

Categories : Legal EthicsTags :

ABA Formal Opinion 499 Provides Critical Guidance for Attorneys Considering Investment in Jurisdictions Allowing Nonlawyer Ownership of Law Firms

On By sdcountybar

By Andrew A. Servais

California Rule of Professional Conduct and ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 5.4 feature a number of prohibitions designed to preserve the professional independence of lawyers, including prohibiting the sharing of legal fees with a nonlawyer, forming a partnership with a nonlawyer (if any of the activities of the partnership consist of the practice of law), and practicing in a business structure in which a nonlawyer owns any interest in the business or serves as a corporate director or officer. Read More

Categories : Law Practice Legal EthicsTags :

The Ethical Implications of Representing a Minor Whose Guardian Ad Litem is Not Serving the Best Interests of the Minor

On By sdcountybar

By Richard D. Hendlin

This Ethics in Brief article arises from a recent inquiry I received through the SDCBA Legal Ethics Hotline (phone: 619.231.0781×4145) involving an attorney who posed the hypothetical question of whether an attorney who represents a minor with a guardian ad litem [GAL] could ethically petition the superior court to remove the GAL who the attorney believes is not following the attorney’s advice and not acting in the minor’s best interests? Read More

Categories : Legal EthicsTags :

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

On By sdcountybar

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.”