Dru Stevenson, Professor of Law

The American Bar Association  Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility just posted a new ethics opinion related to judges: ABA Formal Op. 26-521 The Judicial Canons of Ethics Applicability to the Administrative and Supervisory Role of a Judge From the Executive Summary:         This opinion examines the ethical obligations of judges under the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct when exercising administrative, employment, and supervisory authority. The Canons and Rules governing impartiality, integrity, and independence - particularly Canons 1 and 2 and associated rules require judges to administer chambers and court staff with the same fairness and neutrality that guide adjudication. The opinion explains that ethical duties extend beyond the courtroom to include merit-based appointments, the prevention of bias and harassment, and the avoidance of favoritism or the appearance of impropriety in all administrative decisions. Judges fulfill t...

Ethical Issues with Lawyers Openly Carrying Firearms    St. Mary’s Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics (Forthcoming) December 18, 2019 Abstract Ethical concerns arise when lawyers openly carry firearms to adversarial meetings related to representation, such as depositions and settlement negotiations. Visible firearms introduce an element of intimidation, or at least the potential for misunderstandings and escalation of conflicts. The adverse effects of openly carried firearms can impact opposing parties, opposing counsel, the lawyer’s potential clients, witnesses, and even judges and jurors encountered outside the courtroom. The ABA’s Model Rules of Professional in their current form include provisions that could be applicable, such as rules against coercion and intimidation, but there is no explicit reference to firearms. Several reported incidents with lawyers and firearms have occurred in recent years, and as states liberalize their “open carry” laws, as well ...

Codes of legal ethics vary state by state, but most draw heavily from the ABA's Model Rules of Professional Conduct.  The ABA has revised Rule 1.6 (duty of confidentiality) in recent years, adding or clarifying exceptions, and states have been adopting these revisions very gradually, leading to many splits between states about when a lawyer can, or must, divulge confidential client information.  I have a new  article on SSRN  criticizing the confidentiality rules from a variety of angles:  Against Confidentiality .   Feedback is welcome!  Here is the abstract: Confidentiality rules form an important part of the ethical codes for lawyers, as a modern, expansive extension of the traditional attorney-client privilege doctrine.  The legal academy, judiciary, and practitioners generally agree on the conventional wisdom that strict confidentiality rules are necessary to foster client-lawyer communication, thereby providing lawyers with i...