DOCSLIB.ORG

Attorney-Client Privilege in Estate Planning, Administration and Litigation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Attorney-Client Privilege in Estate Planning, Administration and Litigation ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE IN ESTATE PLANNING, ADMINISTRATION AND LITIGATION Hon. Anne E. Lazarus Judge of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania Adam T. Gusdorff, Esq. Heckscher Teillon Terrill & Sager, P.C. 1 Jennifer DiVeterano Gayle, Esq. Mannion Prior, LLP THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE In Pennsylvania, the attorney-client privilege is statutory: In a civil matter counsel shall not be competent or permitted to testify to confidential communications made to him by his client, nor shall the client be compelled to disclosed the same, unless in either case the privilege is waived upon the trial by the client. 20 Pa. C.S.A. § 5928. 2 GENERAL PRINCIPLES The attorney-client privilege operates in a two- way fashion, protecting all: confidential client-to-attorney communications and confidential attorney-to-client communications made for the purpose of obtaining or providing professional legal advice. Gillard v. AIG Ins. Co., 15 A.3d 44, 59 (Pa. 2011). The privilege is not affected by the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence. 3 RATIONALE AND PURPOSE The attorney-client Rather, the purpose of privilege is not concerned the attorney-client with: privilege is: prejudice; to foster a confidence the ascertainment of the between client and truth; or attorney that will “lead to a trusting and open the reliability of attorney- attorney-client dialogue.” client communications. “The aim of the attorney-client privilege is ‘to encourage full and frank communication between attorneys and clients thereby promoting broader public interests in the observance of law and administration of justice.’” U.S. v. Jicarilla Apache Nation, 564 U.S. 162, 169 (2011) (quoting 4 Upjohn Co. v. U.S., 449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981)) PRIVILEGE DISTINGUISHED FROM CONFIDENTIALITY Duty of Confidentiality under Pa. R.P.C. 1.6: Broader than attorney-client privilege Not substantive law Applies in situations other than where evidence sought from attorney through compulsion of law “Derivative” duties of counsel to beneficiaries under Pew Trust: Prohibit attorney from taking advantage of position to detriment of fiduciary estate or beneficiaries May require attorney to take affirmative action to protect interests of beneficiaries 5 PRIVILEGE DISTINGUISHED FROM WORK PRODUCT DOCTRINE Work Product Doctrine under Pa. R.C.P. 4003.3: Broader than attorney-client privilege Protects the mental impressions of a party’s attorney and his or her conclusions, opinions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal theories. Protects the mental impressions of the attorneys’ agent and his or her conclusions or opinions respecting the value or merit of a claim or defense or respecting strategy or tactics. Belongs to the attorney, not the client But, the client may waive the work product doctrine by invoking a good faith reliance on advice of counsel defense. 6 THE BASICS The client holds the privilege and has the right to assert it. Four elements must be met to invoke the attorney- client privilege: 1. The person asserting the privilege is, or seeks to be, a client; 2. The communication is between the person and an attorney, or the attorney’s subordinate; 3. The communication relates to a fact of which the attorney was informed by the client, without the presence of strangers, for the purpose of seeking legal advice, and not for the purpose of committing a crime or tort; and 4. The privilege has been claimed and is not waived by the client. 7 GREGURY V. GREGURAS The attorney-client privilege may not be used as a shield during discovery, then waived at trial. “An eleventh-hour waiver has considerable potential to create unfair surprise and prejudice to the other party, and it is the role of the trial court to prevent it by reasonable means.” 196 A.3d 619 (Pa. Super. 2018) (en banc), app. den. 205 A.3d 1230 (Pa. 2019) 8 THE BASICS, CONTINUED The attorney-client privilege survives: the termination of the attorney-client relationship; and the death of the client. However, death “substantially reduces” the possibility that the client’s rights and interests could be significantly affected by disclosure of the confidential communications.” Cohen v. Jenkintown Cab. Co., 357 A.2d 689, 693 (Pa. Super. 1976). 9 THE JOINT CLIENT PRIVILEGE The joint client privilege applies when multiple clients hire the same attorney to represent them on matters of common interest. A communication of either co-client that otherwise qualifies as privileged and relates to matters of common interest is privileged as against third parties. The communications are not privileged as between co-clients. The joint client privilege may only be waived by the consent of all joint clients. 10 REPRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE CLIENTS Rule 1.7(a). Conflict of Interest: Current Clients A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if: the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person, or by a personal interest of the lawyer. 11 REPRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE CLIENTS Rule 1.7(b). Conflict of Interest: Current Clients Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of interest under paragraph (a), a lawyer may represent a client if: the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client; the representation is not prohibited by law; the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against the other client in the same litigation; and each affected client gives informed consent. 12 THE JOINT DEFENSE DOCTRINE The joint defense doctrine extends the attorney- client privilege to a group of two or more clients who have retained separate counsel when each has a common interest in the litigation. The joint defense privilege protects communications between an individual and an attorney for another party if they form “part of an on-going and joint effort to set up a common defense strategy.” 13 THE JOINT DEFENSE DOCTRINE There are four factors for the privilege to apply: 1. the parties’ agreement; 2. a common interest in the litigation or jointly shared litigation strategy; 3. the communications were made pursuant to such agreement; and 4. the continued confidentiality of the communication. Pennsylvania Public Utility Comm’n v. Sunrise Energy, LLC, 177 A.3d 438 (Pa. Commw. 2018). A written agreement is not necessary. 14 PROCEDURAL ISSUES Pennsylvania law imposes a shifting burden of proof in disputes over disclosure of communications allegedly protected by the attorney-client privilege. The party invoking a privilege must initially set forth facts showing that the privilege has been property invoked. The burden then shifts to the party seeking disclosure to set forth facts showing that disclosure will not violate the attorney-client privilege. 15 PROCEDURAL ISSUES During discovery: Generally, a discovery order is not immediately appealable. However, a court order requiring disclosure of privileged material is immediately appealable as a collateral order under Pa. R.A.P. 313 as: the order is separable from and collateral to the main cause of action; the right involved is too important to be denied review; and the question presented is such that if review is postponed until final judgment in the case, the claim will be irreparably lost. 16 PROCEDURAL ISSUES At trial: The court may not hear testimony or accept evidence subject to a later ruling on an objection based upon the attorney-client privilege. The statute proscribes “not only giving evidentiary consideration to confidential communications, but also their very disclosure.” Estate of Kofsky, 409 A.2d 1358, 1362 (Pa. 1979). 17 WAIVER OF THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE The attorney client privilege may be waived by: The client’s own act Disclosure to third party Failing to object at the Trial Court level Inadvertent disclosure in discovery When the client puts the advice at issue: Subsequent adversarial proceeding between the client and counsel; or Client raises good faith reliance on advice of counsel as an affirmative defense in litigation. 18 THE TESTAMENTARY EXCEPTION United State Supreme Court recognized a “testamentary exception” for over a century: [I]n a suit between devisees under a will, statements made by the deceased to counsel respecting the execution of the will, or other similar document, are not privileged. Glover v. Patten, 165 U.S. 394, 406 (1897). 19 THE TESTAMENTARY EXCEPTION Theavos Estate, 30 Fiduc. Rep. 2d 140 (O.C. Centre 2010) Recognized the “testamentary exception” for the first time in Pennsylvania, finding that such an exception “furthers the client’s intent.” Concluded that such exception is proper where “deceased holder of attorney-client privilege is suspected of having been unduly influenced to change the planned disposition of his estate after his death.” Acknowledged that the documentation sought may eliminate or affirm the caveator’s/contestant’s suspicions. 20 THE TESTAMENTARY EXCEPTION Hughes Estate, 8 Fiduc. Rep. 3d 169 (O.C. Cumb 2018) Granted petition of putative beneficiary seeking waiver of attorney-client privilege, as “there is no doubt that the interests of justice would be frustrated by an exercise of the attorney-client privilege.” 21 THE TESTAMENTARY EXCEPTION Fasick Estate, 3 Fiduc. Rep. 3d 89 (O.C. Cumb. 2012) Petition to obtain copies of prior Wills under which charity believed it would receive larger share of estate granted. Court analogized the petition to one for pre-complaint discovery, and held that it would be inequitable to require the charity to file “a premature will contest before it has access to the predicate documents necessary to maintain such an action.” Concluded that testamentary exception to attorney- client privilege “renders the prior wills discoverable.” 22 THE TESTAMENTARY EXCEPTION Collautt v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Part I (Strength and Scope of the Duty)
    Confidentiality: Part I McGuireWoods LLP (Strength and Scope of the Duty) T. Spahn (6/2/15) Hypotheticals and Analyses ABA Master CONFIDENTIALITY: PART I (STRENGTH AND SCOPE OF THE DUTY) Hypotheticals and Analyses* Thomas E. Spahn McGuireWoods LLP * These analyses primarily rely on the ABA Model Rules, which represent a voluntary organization's suggested guidelines. Every state has adopted its own unique set of mandatory ethics rules, and you should check those when seeking ethics guidance. For ease of use, these analyses and citations use the generic term "legal ethics opinion" rather than the formal categories of the ABA's and state authorities' opinions -- including advisory, formal and informal. ______________________ © 2015 McGuireWoods LLP. McGuireWoods LLP grants you the right to download and/or reproduce this work for personal, educational use within your organization only, provided that you give proper attribution and do not alter the work. You are not permitted to re-publish or re-distribute the work to third parties without permission. Please email Thomas E. Spahn ([email protected]) with any questions or requests. 6693340_11 Confidentiality: Part I McGuireWoods LLP (Strength and Scope of the Duty) T. Spahn (6/2/15) Hypotheticals and Analyses ABA Master TABLE OF CONTENTS Hypo No. Subject Page Strength of Confidentiality Duties 1 Strength of the Ethics Duty ....................................................................... 1 2 Strength of the Attorney-Client Privilege ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lawyers and Social Media: the Legal Ethics of Tweeting, Facebooking and Blogging
    Touro Law Review Volume 28 Number 1 Article 7 July 2012 Lawyers and Social Media: The Legal Ethics of Tweeting, Facebooking and Blogging Michael E. Lackey Jr. Joseph P. Minta Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview Part of the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons Recommended Citation Lackey, Michael E. Jr. and Minta, Joseph P. (2012) "Lawyers and Social Media: The Legal Ethics of Tweeting, Facebooking and Blogging," Touro Law Review: Vol. 28 : No. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol28/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Touro Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lackey and Minta: Lawyers and Social Media LAWYERS AND SOCIAL MEDIA: THE LEGAL ETHICS OF TWEETING, FACEBOOKING AND BLOGGING By Michael E. Lackey Jr.* and Joseph P. Minta** *** I. INTRODUCTION Lawyers should not—and often cannot—avoid social media. Americans spend more than 20% of their online time on social media websites, which is more than any other single type of website.1 Many young lawyers grew up using the Internet and spent most of their college and law school years using social media sites. Some older attorneys have found that professionally-focused social media sites are valuable networking tools, and few big companies or law firms would ignore the marketing potential of websites like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn or YouTube. Finally, for litigators, these sites pro- vide valuable information about witnesses and opposing parties.2 Yet social media sites are also rife with professional hazards for unwary attorneys.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics in Estate and Trust Administrations the Obvious and the Oblivious By: Sandra F
    Ethics in Estate and Trust Administrations The Obvious and the Oblivious By: Sandra F. Diamond, Esq. and Laird A. Lile, Esq.1 I. Introduction - Sources of the Rules A. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct (“MRPC”) were adopted by the ABA in 1983. Florida subsequently embraced the Model Rules in Chapter 4 of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar. That chapter specifically defines and discusses the Rules of Professional Conduct (“RPC”) required of lawyers in Florida. Many of the Rules and much of the accompanying commentary are directed to the ethical dilemmas and conflicts confronted by the trial lawyers or those involved in pursuing or defending criminal matters. There appears to be less focus on the applicability of the Rules to the practices of the estate planner and the estate administrator. B. The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel (“ACTEC”) adopted in 1993 the ACTEC Commentaries on the Model Rules of Professional Conduct (“the Commentaries”). A Fourth Edition of the Commentaries was adopted in 2006, expanding the annotations and providing guidance to trust and estate lawyers who are generally involved in non-adversarial and often multi party representations. (Copies of the ACTEC Commentaries are available at http://www.actec.org/public/commentariespublic.asp.) C. Additionally, there are several other sources which define the duty and conduct of lawyers in the estate planning arena. Lawyers practicing in the estate tax law area are subject to the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and accompanying rules found in Treasury Circular 230. D. The duties of lawyers are also addressed in the Restatement (Third), Law Governing Lawyers published by the American Law Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sense of a Client: Confidentiality Issues in Representing the Elderly
    Fordham Law Review Volume 62 Issue 5 Article 13 1994 The Sense of a Client: Confidentiality Issues in Representing the Elderly Burnele V. Powell Ronald C. Link Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Burnele V. Powell and Ronald C. Link, The Sense of a Client: Confidentiality Issues in Representing the Elderly, 62 Fordham L. Rev. 1197 (1994). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol62/iss5/13 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Sense of a Client: Confidentiality Issues in Representing the Elderly Cover Page Footnote Professor of Law, The University of North Carolina. B.A. 1970, University of Missouri at Kansas City; J.D. 1975, University of Wisconsin; L.L.M. 1979, Harvard. Professor of Law, The University of North Carolina. B.A. 1961, University of Illinois; M.A. 1962, University of California at Berkeley; J.D. 1965, University of Illinois. The authors are grateful for the research and drafting assistance provided by University of North Carolina School of Law students Mary Beth Jones (Class of 1995) and Amy Scott (Class of 1994). This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol62/iss5/13 THE SENSE OF A CLIENT: CONFIDENTIALITY ISSUES IN REPRESENTING THE ELDERLY BURNELE V POWELL* and RONALD C.
    [Show full text]
  • Scr Chapter 20 Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys
    SCR CHAPTER 20 RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT FOR ATTORNEYS Preamble: A Lawyer's Responsibilities Scope 1.0 Terminology CLIENT-LAWYER RELATIONSHIP 1.1 Competence 1.2 Scope of representation and allocation of authority between lawyer and client 1.3 Diligence 1.4 Communication 1.5 Fees 1.6 Confidentiality 1.7 Conflicts of interest current clients 1.8 Conflict of interest: prohibited transactions 1.9 Duties to former clients 1.10 Imputed disqualification: general rule 1.11 Special conflicts of interest for former and current government officers and employees 1.12 Former judge, arbitrator, mediator or other 3rd-party neutral 1.13 Organization as client 1.14 Client with diminished capacity 1.15 Safekeeping property; trust accounts and fiduciary accounts (a) Definitions (b) Segregation of property (c) Types of trust accounts (d) Interest on Lawyer Trust Account (IOLTA) requirements (e) Prompt notice and delivery of property (f) Security requirements and restricted transactions (g) Record keeping requirements for trust accounts (h) Dishonored payment notification (Overdraft notices) (i) Trust account certificate and acknowledgements (j) Multi-jurisdictional practice (k) Fiduciary property (m) Exceptions to this section 1.16 Declining or terminating representation 1.17 Sale of law practice 1.18 Duties to prospective client 63 PREAMBLE: A LAWYER'S RESPONSIBILITIES [1] A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice. [2] 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.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of Client-Lawyer Confidentiality ... and Its Exceptions
    Nebraska Law Review Volume 81 | Issue 4 Article 4 2003 In Defense of Client-Lawyer Confidentiality ... and Its Exceptions ... Susan R. Martyn University of Toledo, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr Recommended Citation Susan R. Martyn, In Defense of Client-Lawyer Confidentiality ... and Its Exceptions ..., 81 Neb. L. Rev. (2002) Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol81/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Susan R. Martyn* In Defense of Client-Lawyer Confidentiality... and Its Exceptions... TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .......................................... 1320 II. Defending Confidentiality ............................. 1321 A. Utilitarian Justifications .......................... 1323 B. Deontological Justifications ........................ 1328 III. Defending the Exceptions ............................. 1330 A. Client Consent, Express or Implied ................ 1331 B. Physical Harm .................................... 1335 C. Financial Harm ................................... 1338 D. Seeking Advice .................................... 1343 E. Self Defense ....................................... 1344 F. Other Law ........................................ 1346 IV. Conclusion ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical and Conflict of Interest Considerations in Estate Planning
    DANGER, WILL ROBINSON! ETHICAL AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS IN ESTATE PLANNING William T. Hennessey Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A. West Palm Beach, Florida William T. Hennessey (E-mail: [email protected]) chairs the Probate, Trust, and Guardianship Litigation Practice Group and is co-chair of the Private Wealth Services Practice Group for the law firm of Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A. (Telephone: (561) 650-0663) in West Palm Beach, Florida. Mr. Hennessey practices primarily in areas of estate, trust, and guardianship litigation. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trust and Estate Counsel and has been recognized as a Florida Super Lawyer, as one of the Best Lawyers in America and as Lawyer of the Year in Trust and Estate Litigation by Best Lawyers in America, a Top Lawyer by South Florida Legal Guide, and AV-rated by Martindale-Hubbell. He and has co-authored numerous articles on probate litigation in Florida, including Will Construction, in LITIGATION UNDERFLORIDAPROBATECODE(8th ed. 2011) and Intestate Succession, in LITIGATIONUNDER FLORIDAPROBATECODE (8th ed. 2011), published by The Florida Bar, Continuing Legal Education as well as the Elective Share, in PRACTICEUNDERFLORIDAPROBATECODE(6th ed. 2010). Mr. Hennessey is the Immediate Past Chair of the Probate and Trust Litigation Committee of the Real Property, Probate, and Trust Law Section (RPPTL) ofthe Florida Bar and is a member of RPPTL's Executive Council and Executive Committee. He is current Chair of the Ad Hoc Estate Planning Conflicts of Interest Committee and is a Chair of the Legislation Committee for RPPTL. He serves on the Trust Law Committee and the Probate Law and Procedure Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Clerk's Duty of Confidentiality
    [VoL 129:1230 THE LAW CLERK'S DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY Preserving the confidentiality of judges' work has been "an honored tradition among law clerks." 1 Former clerks, especially those of United States Supreme Court Justices, have occasionally published reminiscences of their court experiences,2 but "none of these [publications] has gone to details of particular cases or to work habits and attitudes of justices as they relate to other justices." 1 This traditional secrecy recently was shattered by the publication of The Brethren4 and by the testimony of law clerks before a televised California judicial conduct investigation. 5 The authors of The Brethren asserted that 170 former law clerks were among their anonymous sources and that "dozens of sources" handed over con- ference notes, diaries, unpublished opinion drafts, and internal memoranda between Justices.0 The California incident was less I Wright, Observations of an Appellate Judge: The Use of Law Clerks, 26 VAND. L. 11Ev. 1179, 1189 n.38 (1973). See W.O. DOUGLAS, TnE COURT YEARS: 1939-1975, at 174 (1980) ("In the long years I served, there was never any suspicion that a clerk violated a confidence of the Court."). But cf. Newland, Personal Assistants to Supreme Court Justices: The Law Clerks, 40 OR. L. REv. 299, 310 (1961) (reporting a United States Supreme Court law clerk's 1919 leak of a forthcoming opinion to stock market dealers as the only leak leading to legal action against a Court clerk); B. WOODWARD & S. AamsM-ONC, Tim BREThmEN 237-38, 150 (1979) (a law clerk provided background to Time magazine regard- ing a forthcoming decision; law clerks who played basketball with the Solicitor General's staff leaked decision dates).
    [Show full text]
  • Director Confidentiality
    MOSCOW 1/1/2011 DIRECTOR CONFIDENTIALITY CYRIL MOSCOW* I INTRODUCTION The Hewlett-Packard board-leak-investigation scandal in 2006 and the push for board representation by shareholder activists both focused attention on the obligation of directors to maintain the confidentiality of corporate information.1 There is, however, sparse analysis of that aspect of director duties in American legal materials. The Corporate Directors Guidebook contains the bare proposition that “a director must keep confidential all matters involving the corporation that have not been disclosed to the public.”2 The Guidebook also provides the following supporting material: A director who improperly disclosed nonpublic information to persons outside the corporation could harm the corporation’s competitive position or damage investor relations and, if the information is material, could trigger personal liability as a tipper of inside information or cause the corporation to violate federal securities laws. Equally important, the unauthorized disclosure of nonpublic information by directors can damage the bond of trust between and among directors and management, discourage candid discussions, and jeopardize boardroom effectiveness and director collaboration.3 This article explores the need to modify the flat recitation of a rule of director confidentiality in light of the limited authority for a blanket restriction, and the necessary exceptions in the business contexts in which the issue arises. In particular, many situations do not involve damage to the corporation, or there is express or implied consent to the sharing of information. Copyright © 2011 by Cyril Moscow. This article is also available at http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/lcp. * Partner, Honigman Miller Schwartz & Cohn LLP (Detroit, Michigan).
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics and Conflict of Interest and Duties
    ETHICS AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND DUTIES • AN OVERVIEW • HOW THE LAW SOCIETY ASSISTS PRACTITIONERS CONFLICT OF INTEREST: What it is How it arises How to avoid it What to do about an asserted conflict of interest APRIL 2006 VIRGINIA P SHIRVINGTON B.A., LL.B (SYD.) SOLICITOR SENIOR ETHICS SOLICITOR, LAW SOCIETY OF NEW SOUTH WALES (WITH ASSISTANCE IN THE PREPARATION OF CASE STUDIES FROM JENNIE PAKULA AND MARYANNE COUSINS, ETHICS SOLICITORS) Telephone: (02) 99260390 Fax: (02) 92215804 Email: [email protected] Law Society website: www.lawsociety.com.au 2 CONTENTS [1] Introduction [2] Restatement of some general concepts – ethical duties – the fiduciary duty [3] Conflict of interest - some general comments – potential and actual breaches of duty [4] What to do About a Possible Conflict of Interest [5] The Court’s Role - The Law Society’s Role [ 6] Revised Professional Conduct and Practice Rules [7] Fundamental Duties and the Fiduciary Duty to the Client [8] Acting for More than One Party [9] Acting Against a Former Client [10] Preventive measures: Conflicts registers/checks; Information Barriers [11] Where the Solicitor’s Own Interest is Involved and Disclosing Personal Interests [12] Solicitor/Material Witness [13] Miscellaneous points, Common misconceptions , FAQs [14] Useful links [15] Concluding Remarks 3 [1] Introduction One of the objects for which the Law Society was established was the suppression of dishonourable conduct. With that object in mind the Society provides guidance to practitioners on ethical issues through the Ethics Section of the Professional Standards Department. Many of those enquiries come from practitioners who feel they or another practitioner may be faced with a conflict of interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Trust & Estate Ethics Practice Advisory
    P a g e | 1 Colorado Bar Association Ethics Committee Practice Area Ethics Advisory – Trusts & Estates May 20, 2020 Introduction As the reporters for The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel Commentaries on the Model Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC), 5th Ed. (2016) (ACTEC Commentaries) recognize, the “duties of trusts and estates lawyers are defined in many states by opinions rendered in malpractice actions, which provide incomplete and insufficient guidance regarding the ethical duties of lawyers.” (ACTEC Commentaries, Reporter’s Note, First Ed., p. 1). The late federal district judge Stanley Sporkin has noted that, “The existing ethics codes merely espouse certain general principles that apply to all lawyers, such as you don’t co-mingle a client’s funds with your own. They do not provide enough fact-specific provisions that apply directly to many of the various legal specialties.” The Need for Separate Codes of Professional Conduct for the Various Specialties, 7 Geo. J. Legal Ethics 149 (1993), quoted in ACTEC Commentaries, Reporter’s Note, Second Ed., p.4. As a separate set of rules of professional conduct for practitioners in the trust & estates area has not emerged thus far and is unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future, this Practice Area Ethics Advisory provides guidance on a number of ethical issues that may be encountered by lawyers practicing in the areas of trusts and estates. The eight advisories in Section I (each an Advisory) were written by members of the Ethics Committee of the Colorado Bar Association (Committee). Section II, beginning on page 43, contains numbered summaries of opinions (Op.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethicis Opinion 2014-F-158 FINAL 6-24-14
    BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE FORMAL ETHICS OPINION 2014-F-158 Can a lawyer who represented a testator refuse to honor a court order or subpoena to disclose, prior to the client’s death, a Will or other testamentary document executed when the testator was competent on the basis that the document is protected against disclosure by the attorney-client privilege or confidentiality. QUESTION The inquiring attorney asserts that it has become increasingly common for courts to appoint attorneys in a representative capacity to represent individuals suffering from dementia and/or Alzheimer’s who are the subject of a dispute or litigation regarding management of the individual’s funds and/or person. It is asserted that attorneys involved in elder-law practice, guardianships, conservatorships, and guardian-ad-litems (GAL)/attorney-ad-litems (AAL) appointed by the court seek the “ward’s” last Will and Testament by request, court order or subpoena from the lawyer or law firm which prepared and/or is in custody of the Will. The Will is sought prior to the death of the testator on the basis of alleged need for the appointed lawyer to engage in “estate planning” on behalf of the ward. The inquiring attorney asks: • Is the law firm and/or each attorney in the firm responsible for asserting the attorney-client privilege if a person other than the client request delivery of the Last Will and Testament before the client’s death? Response: Yes, if requested in a judicial proceeding and there are non frivolous claims that the Will is protected against disclosure by the attorney client-privilege or other applicable law, as required by Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) 1.6(c)(2).
    [Show full text]