Dan Voelpel | Tacoma/Pierce Tribune |

    Editorials | Tacoma/Pierce Tribune

    Peter Callaghan | Tacoma/Pierce Tribune

      Kathleen Merryman | Tacoma/Pierce Tribune

      Paul Krugman | New York Times

      « My Black Baptism | Main | Equus »

      Two Versions of the Law

      Doug Schafer pointed out this 'small problem to me'. Former Seattle City Attorney Mark Sidran was fond in his speeches of noting how such small problems can lead to bigger one's. This is perhaps the pre-eminent example.

      In the early 1980's the Washington State Bar made some changes to the 'Rules of Professional Conduct' (RPC), including 3.3 D. This rule concerns the necessity of a legal professional reporting the illegal behavior of a client, including, perhaps most saliently, another Lawyer.

      Washington State Bar Rules

      Section 3.3 Candor Toward the Tribunal

      .
      .
      .

      (d) If the lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its
      falsity, and disclosure of this fact is prohibited by Rule 1.6, the lawyer
      shall promptly make reasonable efforts to convince the client to consent
      to disclosure. If the client refuses to consent to disclosure, the lawyer
      may seek to withdraw from the representation in accordance with Rule 1.16.


      American Bar Association Model Rules

      Section 3.3 Candor Toward the Tribunal

      .
      .
      .

      d) In an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse.

      You may be aware that just before I started this blog I filed a bar complaint against John McKay. This was, as former Seattle City Attorney (or Rudy Giulianni) would put it - a 'little thing'. Specifically I raised a legal point about the profession's responsibility to the public as spelled out in the Constitution. Personally I'm most concerned about the financial aspect of this - called 'fiduciary responsibility'. This complaint though focuses on election law and illustrates the same problem - the law does not believe they have any responsibility whatsoever to the public.

      Consider, if you will, just how this fact might overlay with the changes in Bar Rules implemented by our local profession. Say 'WA', eh?

      The McKay Bar documents are here, here, and here.
      (These were originally referenced in my blog in my first post ever - 6 months ago, to the day.)

      Schafer has a web site, here:

      TrackBack

      TrackBack URL for this entry:
      http://www.motleytools.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/94

      Post a comment

      Archives

      June 2009

      Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3 4 5 6
      7 8 9 10 11 12 13
      14 15 16 17 18 19 20
      21 22 23 24 25 26 27
      28 29 30        
      Powered by Movable Type 3.35
      Hosted by LivingDot
      AddThis Social Bookmark Button
      Add to Technorati Favorites