|
PREAMBLE, SCOPE AND TERMINOLOGY.
Preamble: A Lawyer's Responsibilities.
A lawyer is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal
system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the
quality of justice.
As a representative of clients, a lawyer performs various functions.
As advisor, a lawyer provides a client with an informed understanding
of the client's legal rights and obligations and explains their
practical implications. As advocate, a lawyer zealously asserts
the client's position under the rules of the adversary system.
As negotiator, a lawyer seeks a result advantageous to the client
but consistent with requirements of honest dealing with others.
As intermediary between clients, a lawyer seeks to reconcile their
divergent interests as an advisor and, to a limited extent, as a
spokesperson for each client. A lawyer acts as evaluator by examining
a client's legal affairs and reporting about them to the client
or to others.
In all professional functions a lawyer should be
competent, prompt and diligent. A lawyer should maintain communications
with a client concerning the representation. A lawyer should keep
in confidence information relating to representation of a client
except so far as disclosure is required or permitted by the Rules
of Professional Conduct or other law.
A lawyer's conduct should conform to the requirements of the
law, both in professional service to clients and in the lawyer's
business and personal affairs. A lawyer should use the law's
procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate
others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system
and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and
public officials. While it is a lawyer's duty, when necessary,
to challenge the rectitude of official action, it is also a lawyer's
duty to uphold legal process.
As a public citizen, a lawyer should seek improvement of the law,
the administration of justice and the quality of service rendered
by the legal profession. As a member of a learned profession, a
lawyer should cultivate knowledge of the law beyond its use for
clients, employ that knowledge in reform of the law and work to
strengthen legal education. A lawyer should be mindful of deficiencies
in the administration of justice and of the fact that the poor,
and sometimes persons who are not poor, cannot afford adequate legal
assistance, and should therefore devote professional time and civic
influence in their behalf. A lawyer should aid the legal profession
in pursuing these objectives and should help the bar regulate itself
in the public interest.
Many of a lawyer's professional responsibilities are prescribed
in the Rules of Professional Conduct, as well as substantive and
procedural law. However, a lawyer is also guided by personal conscience
and the approbation of professional peers. A lawyer should strive
to attain the highest level of skill, to improve the law and the
legal profession and to exemplify the legal profession's ideals
of public service.
A lawyer's responsibilities as a representative of clients,
an officer of the legal system and a public citizen are usually
harmonious. Thus, when an opposing party is well represented, a
lawyer can be a zealous advocate on behalf of a client and at the
same time assume that justice is being done. So also, a lawyer can
be sure that preserving client confidences ordinarily serves the
public interest because people are more likely to seek legal advice,
and thereby heed their legal obligations, when they know their communications
will be private. In the nature of law practice, however, conflicting
responsibilities are encountered. Virtually all difficult ethical
problems arise from conflict between a lawyer's responsibilities
to clients, to the legal system and to the lawyer's own interest
in remaining an upright person while earning a satisfactory living.
The Rules of Professional Conduct prescribe terms for resolving
such conflicts. Within the framework of these Rules many difficult
issues of professional discretion can arise. Such issues must be
resolved through the exercise of sensitive professional and moral
judgment guided by the basic principles underlying the Rules. The
legal profession is largely self-governing. Although other professions
also have been granted powers of self-government, the legal profession
is unique in this respect because of the close relationship between
the profession and processes of government and law enforcement.
This connection is manifested in the fact that ultimate authority
over the legal profession is vested largely in the courts. To the
extent that lawyers meet the obligations of their professional calling,
the occasion for government regulation is obviated. Self-regulation
also helps maintain the legal profession's independence from
government domination. An independent legal profession is an important
force in preserving government under law, for abuse of legal authority
is more readily challenged by a profession whose members are not
dependent on government for the right of practice. The legal profession's
relative autonomy carries with it special responsibilities of self-government.
The profession has a responsibility to assure that its regulations
are conceived in the public interest and not in furtherance of parochial
or self-interested concerns of the bar. Every lawyer is responsible
for observance of the Rules of Professional Conduct. A lawyer should
also aid in securing their observance by other lawyers. Neglect
of these responsibilities compromises the independence of the profession
and the public interest which it serves. Lawyers play a vital role
in the preservation of society. The fulfillment of this role requires
an understanding by lawyers of their relationship to our legal system.
The Rules of Professional Conduct, when properly applied, serve
to define that relationship. (Amended by order entered June 26,
1990, effective July 1, 1990.)
Scope.
The Rules of Professional Conduct are rules of reason.
They should be interpreted with reference to the purposes of legal
representation and of the law itself. Some of the Rules are imperatives,
cast in the terms "shall" or "shall not." These
define proper conduct for purposes of professional discipline. Others,
generally cast in the term "may," are permissive and define
areas under the Rules in which the lawyer has professional discretion.
No disciplinary action should be taken when the lawyer chooses not
to act or acts within the bounds of such discretion. Other Rules
define the nature of relationships between the lawyer and others.
The Rules are thus partly obligatory and disciplinary and partly
constitutive and descriptive in that they define a lawyer's
professional role. Many of the Comments use the term "should."
Comments do not add obligations to the Rules but provide guidance
for practicing in compliance with the Rules.
The Rules presuppose a larger legal context shaping the lawyer's
role. That context includes court rules and statutes relating to
matters of licensure, laws defining specific obligations of lawyers
and substantive and procedural law in general. Compliance with the
Rules, as with all law in an open society, depends primarily upon
understanding and voluntary compliance, secondarily upon reinforcement
by peer and public opinion and finally, when necessary, upon enforcement
through disciplinary proceedings. The Rules do not, however, exhaust
the moral and ethical considerations that should inform a lawyer
for no worthwhile human activity can be completely defined by legal
rules. The Rules simply provide a framework for the ethical practice
of law.
Furthermore, for purposes of determining the lawyer's authority
and responsibility, principles of substantive law external to these
Rules determine whether a client-lawyer relationship exists. Most
of the duties flowing from the client-lawyer relationship attach
only after the client has requested the lawyer to render legal services
and the lawyer has agreed to do so. But there are some duties, such
as that of confidentiality under Rule 1.6, that may attach when
the lawyer agrees to consider whether a client-lawyer relationship
shall be established. Whether a client-lawyer relationship exists
for any specific purpose can depend on the circumstances and may
be a question of fact.
Under various legal provisions, including constitutional, statutory
and common law, the responsibilities of government lawyers may include
authority concerning legal matters that ordinarily reposes in the
client in private client-lawyer relationships. For example, a lawyer
for a government agency may have authority on behalf of the government
to decide upon settlement or whether to appeal from an adverse judgment.
Such authority in various respects is generally vested in the attorney
general and the state's attorney in state government, and their
federal counterparts, and the same may be true of other government
law officers. Also, lawyers under the supervision of these officers
may be authorized to represent several government agencies in intragovernmental
legal controversies in circumstances where a private lawyer could
not represent multiple private clients. They also may have authority
to represent the "public interest" in circumstances where
a private lawyer would not be authorized to do so. These Rules do
not abrogate any such authority.
Failure to comply with an obligation or prohibition imposed by a
Rule is a basis for invoking the disciplinary process. The Rules
presuppose that disciplinary assessment of a lawyer's conduct
will be made on the basis of the facts and circumstances as they
existed at the time of the conduct in question and in recognition
of the fact that a lawyer often has to act upon uncertain or incomplete
evidence of the situation. Moreover, the Rules presuppose that whether
or not discipline should be imposed for a violation, and the severity
of a sanction, depend on all the circumstances. such as the willfulness
and seriousness of the violation, extenuating factors and whether
there have been previous violations.
Violation of a Rule should not give rise to a cause of action nor
should it create any presumption that a legal duty has been breached.
The Rules are designed to provide guidance to lawyers and to provide
a structure for regulating conduct through disciplinary agencies.
They are not designed to be a basis for civil liability. Furthermore,
the purpose of the Rules can be subverted when they are invoked
by opposing parties as procedural weapons. The fact that a Rule
is a just basis for a lawyer's self-assessment, or for sanctioning
a lawyer under the administration of a disciplinary authority, does
not imply that an antagonist in a collateral proceeding or transaction
has standing to seek enforcement of the Rule. Accordingly, nothing
in the Rules should be deemed to augment any substantive legal duty
of lawyers or the extra-disciplinary consequences of violating such
a duty.
Moreover, these Rules are not intended to govern or affect judicial
application of either the attorney-client or work product privilege.
Those privileges were developed to promote compliance with law and
fairness in litigation. In reliance on the attorney-client privilege,
clients are entitled to expect that communications within the scope
of the privilege will be protected against compelled disclosure.
The attorney-client privilege is that of the client and not of the
lawyer. The fact that in exceptional situations the lawyer under
the Rules has a limited discretion to disclose a client confidence
does not vitiate the proposition that, as a general matter, the
client has a reasonable expectation that information relating to
the client will not be voluntarily disclosed and that disclosure
of such information may be judicially compelled only in accordance
with recognized exceptions to the attorney-client and work product
privileges.
The lawyer's exercise of discretion not to disclose information
under Rule 1.6 should not be subject to reexamination. Permitting
such reexamination would be incompatible with the general policy
of promoting compliance with law through assurances that communications
will be protected against disclosure.
The Comment accompanying each Rule explains and illustrates the
meaning and purpose of the Rule. The Preamble and this note on Scope
provide general orientation. The Comments are intended as guides
to interpretation, but the text of each Rule is authoritative. Research
notes were prepared to compare counterparts in the ABA Model Code
of Professional Responsibility (adopted 1969, as amended) and to
provide selected references to other authorities. The notes have
not been adopted, do not constitute part of the Model Rules, and
are not intended to affect the application or interpretation of
the Rules and Comments. {Amended by order entered June 26, 1990,
effective July 1, 1990.)
Terminology.
"Belief" or "believes" denotes that
the person involved actually supposed the fact in question to be
true. A person's belief may be inferred from circum- stances.
"Consult" or "consultation" denotes communication
of information reasonably sufficient to permit the client to appreciate
the significance of the matter in question.
"Firm" or "law firm" denotes a lawyer or lawyers
in a private firm, lawyers employed in the legal department of a
corporation or other organization and lawyers employed in a legal
service organization.
"Fraud" or "fraudulent" denotes conduct having
a purpose to deceive and not merely negligent misrepresentation
or failure to apprise another of relevant information.
"Knowingly," "known," or "knows" denotes
actual knowledge of the fact in question. A person's knowledge
may be inferred from circumstances.
"Partner" denotes a member of a partnership and a shareholder
in a law firm organized as a professional corporation.
"Reasonable" or "reasonably" when used in relation
to conduct by a lawyer denotes the conduct of a reasonably prudent
and competent lawyer.
"Reasonable belief" or "reasonably believes"
when used in reference to a lawyer denotes that the lawyer believes
the matter in question and that the circumstances are such that
the belief is reasonable.
"Reasonably should know" when used in reference to a lawyer
denotes that a lawyer of reasonable prudence and competence would
ascertain the matter in question.
"Substantial" when used in reference to degree or extent
denotes a material matter of clear and weighty importance.
|