First, an attorney does not have to disclose whether s/he represents a particular party. This information can be deemed privileged, and there might be circumstances under which disclosing the very fact of attorney-client relationship can be a malpractice.
Full Answer
You are right, it is very unusual for an attorney to call and not disclose who his client is. However, it can occur. However, you are under no obligation to answer any questions either. * This will flag comments for moderators to take action. I would contact your employer or their attorney and advise them of the situation.
A lawyer cannot speak to a person who is represented by counsel. Have your attorney contact the attorney. Report Abuse Report Abuse Please explain why you are flagging this content: * This will flag comments for moderators to take action.
If a person is really an attorney, they'll have an identifying number with the Oregon State Bar (this answer applies to Oregon). You can then check them out professionally at osbar.org. Oddly, if the client has asked that the lawyer keep his name confidential, then the lawyer can't tell you who he represents.
If considering that approach, a lawyer should document their repeated efforts at contact and warning of the consequence of a nonresponse. Keep in mind, however, that unless mandated by law or court order, no ethics rule specifies that attorneys have to respond to other attorneys.
Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other, and a lawyer is not prohibited from advising a client concerning a communication that the client is legally entitled to make.
Ultimately, it isn't uncommon for attorneys in the community to have a friendly relationship. Don't be afraid if you even see the attorneys partake in some light banter back and forth.
An example would be a minor who needs representation and whose fees are being paid for by their parents. If the parents feel that they are entitled to privileged communication, or that they have the right to direct the attorney in the proceedings, this would be a conflict of interest.
No California legal ethics rule expressly prohibits a non-lawyer client from contacting another party directly, although clients cannot be used as conduits for indirect prohibited contact from lawyers.
8 Tips for Dealing with Difficult Opposing CounselPoint out Common Ground. ... Don't be Afraid to Ask Why. ... Separate the Person from the Problem. ... Focus on your Interests. ... Don't Fall for your Assumptions. ... Take a Calculated Approach. ... Control the Conversation by Reframing. ... Pick up the Phone.
Wolfram's “Modern Legal Ethics,” the no contact rule, as a general proposition, prohibits a lawyer who is representing a client from contacting a party known to be represented by another party. The no contact rule first found its way into the American Bar Association's canons of ethics in 1908.
Professional misconduct is the most common reason for attorney discipline. Lawyers can also be disciplined for conduct in their personal lives.
Conflict of InterestContractual or legal obligations (to business partners, vendors, employees, employer, etc.)Loyalty to family and friends.Fiduciary duties.Professional duties.Business interests.
A conflict of interest exists if a legislator has any interest or engages in any business, transaction, or professional activity, or incurs any obligation, which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his or her duties in the public interest.
By David L. Hudson Jr. Under the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, attorneys can't represent clients if they have a marital or familial relationship with opposing counsel unless they get informed consent in writing from their client.
In a nutshell, if opposing counsel isn't responding: Document your repeated efforts at contact, including your statement of the consequence of continued nonresponse. Wait a reasonable amount of time. To be safe, get a court order authorizing direct contact.
If your lawyer still does not respond, you can send him or her a letter explaining the communication problems. If at this point you do not hear anything from your lawyer, you should consult with a legal malpractice attorney.
As such, it is usually best to meet other lawyers in person or call them on the phone so that attorneys can have a personal connection with people whom they are contacting. However, many lawyers do not pick up the phone and rather rely almost exclusively on email to communicate with others.
If your lawyer still does not respond, you can send him or her a letter explaining the communication problems. If at this point you do not hear anything from your lawyer, you should consult with a legal malpractice attorney.
Can a lawyer advise friends, family members and their spouse? Lawyers are allowed to advise friends, family members, spouses and other people with whom they are acquainted. A lawyer is not in a conflict of interest simply because the lawyer is representing a family member or a friend.
In a nutshell, if opposing counsel isn't responding: Document your repeated efforts at contact, including your statement of the consequence of continued nonresponse. Wait a reasonable amount of time. To be safe, get a court order authorizing direct contact.
We've all heard horror stories from the legal trenches.... Your lawyer fails to show up, he doesn't make an objection when it's the most important moment, he or she loses your big case for you...
I had a person call and say they "were an attorney" and they were seeking information about a case my company has with an individual. I specifically asked the "attorney", are you an attorney, and do you represent this person in regards to this matter?"
Transactions With Persons Other Than Clients [1] This Rule contributes to the proper functioning of the legal system by protecting a person who has chosen to be represented by a lawyer in a matter against possible overreaching by other lawyers who are participating in the matter, interference by those lawyers with the client-lawyer relationship and the uncounselled disclosure of information ...
Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.
Your lawyer has a responsibility to advocate for you, but their loyalty has limits.. If the evidence shows that the accident wasn’t the way you described it — if you were more at fault than you originally admitted, or if you weren’t truthful about the circumstances or your resulting condition — it could be difficult, if not impossible, for your lawyer to zealously represent you.
As a pro se litigant, an attorney plays the role of both counsel and client. Therein lies the problem with Model Rule 4.2: does the restriction upon the attorney (as an attorney) restrict the pro se attorney (as a litigation party) from contacting an adverse party?
[9] In determining that Rule 4.2 is an identity rule, these jurisdictions found that the legal system benefited from a policy preventing attorneys from using their specialized legal knowledge and skills to influence an adversary, even when both sides were represented by counsel.
ABA rule 4.2 does not state specifically whether or not it applies to attorneys who are representing themselves. An attorney can argue that when they are a pro se litigant, they are the client and have the right to discuss matters with an adverse party. However, an attorney who is a pro se litigant is also the attorney representing themselves, and it can be argued that pursuant to Model Rule 4.2, the attorney is ethically prohibited from speaking with an adverse party represented by counsel without “consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order.” [2]
PBA Opinion 2017-200 found that when an attorney is represented by counsel, Rule 4.2 does not apply, reasoning that Rule 4.2 only applies when an attorney is acting in the role of representing a client (or themselves as a pro se litigant). PBA stated that: “Rule 4.2 is a “role rule” since by its terms it applies to lawyers only when they are representing clients. It does not apply to lawyers simply because they are lawyers.” [7] (We note that this seems somewhat at odds with the notion of protecting people from an attorney’s specialized skills).
New York, Hawaii, District of Columbia and Alaska have all come to the same conclusions as the PBA. [6]
A pro se lawyer represents himself or herself as a client . Therefore, the pro se lawyer is prohibited by the literal language of Rule 4.2 from communicating with his or her adversary without the prior consent of his or her adversary’s lawyer. This reading of Rule 4.2 is consistent with the majority of cases which have dealt with the rule and with all of the ethics opinions which have considered the issue.
The well-known old saying often credited to Abraham Lincoln states that “He who represents himself has a fool for a client.”. This article will not comment on the advisability of representing yourself in litigation, but will instead discuss the ethical issues that arise when an attorney is either a pro se litigant (representing him or herself) ...
If an attorney manages to liase many or all all your issues, then you have already lost, especially if they have told you not to talk to the spouse and they have served their purpose by fait accompli. If it comes down to money, you have lost, that is the level of basic understanding marriage has become for males.
If you do decide to appeal the decisions of the family court, the Supreme Court, no less, will very likely uphold and support the malfeasance of the family court because the antics of the lower court personnel mirror those of the Supreme Court. I bet the family court personnel have recognized this and are busy minting.
You should sue for undisclosed conflict of interest. At the very least, file a complaint with the State Bar Association or whoever it is in your state that hear s such things. Seriously. CLAIM DAMAGES.
The gal did not investigate any of the leads I gave him. The magistrate had a stay for seven months. And the clerk of courts refused to send out the subpoenas. The clerk of courts told my attorney’s staff they were to short of staff to fax the subpoenas over my attorney’s office the day before the trial.
And your are right, the judges dont know the laws and/or the Florida Statutes, so no one should take for granted that they do. But the reality is,,they dont know them because they dont have to know them, because they just fly by the seat of their pants and there is no one to check them.
Joseph Sorge , thank you so much for all that you are doing it is so very much appreciated.
Absolutely ! Most have no idea that here in the USA, we do not own our attorneys when we hire them. Attorneys are agents of the court. In essence, we only rent attorneys to represent us in our legal matters. An attorney’s (demanded) allegiance is always to the court first. The client and his/her interests come dead last. The BAR Association (British Attorney Registry) demands that each attorney collude and work for the court. A “client’s best interest” is only a phrase used by attorney’s to catch more clients and make more cash. Attorneys make great actors, they need to be good actors as in many court rooms, they are only acting a part where the script has already been written.
The DSS lawyer is correct. A party who is represented by counsel cannot be contacted directly by opposing counsel unless that party and opposing counsel expressly authorized direct contact.
That is correct - he should not be talking to you without your attorney's permission.
No, they cannot talk to you directly. All communication has to go through the lawyers in order to protect your rights and attorney-client privilege.
” ( here at p. 6 ). “Assuming that these communications involved the subject matter of this litigation, counsel for the United States violated Rule 4.2 unless, as addressed below, [the whistle-blower plaintiff’s] contacts with represented persons were ‘authorized . . . by law.'” See MRPC 4.2. Id.
In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order.
One obvious practice pointer: lawyers should assume they themselves are being surreptitiously recorded all the time. This assumption is obviously overbroad and erroneous to some degree, but lawyers might want to err on the side of over-breadth rather than unfortunately too narrow.
In the linked case, U.S. District Court Judge Wilhemina M. Wright (D. Minn.) seems to answer, “Yes.” She seems to suggest that clients can be found to be “investigative agents” of the lawyers, whose communication to an opposing party, might trigger Rule 4.2 violations against the lawyers.
But, in the end, it is an unsettled question as to whether the client, herself, can function as the lawyer’s conduit.
We note the confusion and ambiguity in commentary to North Carolina’s Rule 4.2 provides: “A lawyer may not make a communication prohibited by this Rule through the acts of another,” which suggests that lawyers cannot orchestrate client-to-adverary-party communications behind the scenes. But the North Carolina Rule 4.2 commentary immediately goes on to say, “However, parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other, and a lawyer is not prohibited from advising a client or, in the case of a government lawyer, investigatory personnel, concerning a communication that the client, or such investigatory personnel, is legally entitled to make.”
You don't really give us many facts here to conclude your attorney is "colluding" with the other side because of some nebulous connection with an investor in one of the marital assets which is apparently involved in the division of your marital property. The division of property in a divorce is often a complicated matter where there are a lot of assets and is subject to a lot of negotiation and uncertainty, even if the parties...
This is always very unlikely. The reason it is unlikely is due to the serious nature of the penalties should the lawyer be caught. Most likely the lawyer learned something in mediation that caused him to do the 180. I would suggest you sit down with your lawyer, in person, and try to express your concerns.
If you lack confidence in your lawyer, tell him her/her immediately, if unsatisfied with the response, you are free to find a new lawyer. You apparently agreed to sign, of course your lawyer was pleased, case coming to a close. Buyers remorse sometimes sets in and the lawyer is the first suspect, not uncommon. If you suspect something more, or ethical you can discuss the matter with a malpractice attorney in your...
When communicating with the accused in a criminal matter, a government lawyer must comply with this Rule in addition to honoring the constitutional rights of the accused. The fact that a communication does not violate a state or federal constitutional right is insufficient to establish that the communication is permissible under this Rule. ...
A lawyer may also seek a court order in exceptional circumstances to authorize a communication that would otherwise be prohibited by this Rule, for example, where communication with a person represented by counsel is necessary to avoid reasonably certain injury.
A lawyer may not make a communication prohibited by this Rule through the acts of another. See Rule 8.4 (a). Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other, and a lawyer is not prohibited from advising a client concerning a communication that the client is legally entitled to make.
Consent of the organization’s lawyer is not required for communication with a former constituent. If a constituent of the organization is represented in the matter by his or her own counsel, the consent by that counsel to a communication will be sufficient for purposes of this Rule. Compare Rule 3.4 (f).
See Rule 1.0 (f). Thus, the lawyer cannot evade the requirement of obtaining the consent of counsel by closing eyes to the obvious.
If the attorney does not represent the client, which I would ask to be confirmed in writing, then you have no obligation to provide any information regarding a case. In some situations, (such as if YOU were an attorney yourself), it would be an ethical violation for you to say anything.
If the attorney refuses to answer your question, simply hang up on him or her. Just because the person is an attorney, that is no license to be rude.
Furthermore, if you or your company is involved with litigation and represented by an attorney already, any other attorneys should never contact you but should go through your attorney directly. This is an ethical rule. If the person tries to contact you again instead of your attorney, let your attorney know right away.
If a person is really an attorney, they'll have an identifying number with the Oregon State Bar (this answer applies to Oregon). You can then check them out professionally at osbar.org. Oddly, if the client has asked that the lawyer keep his name confidential, then the lawyer can't tell you who he represents. However, I'm pretty sure that you can then refuse to answer any questions in other words, you don't give any information until they tell you who's asking. Your company should have legal representation, and you need to tell your company's attorney about this contact.
If you don't like the comments, hang up the phone.
An attorney is not allowed to disclose who they are working for, unless they have that person's permission. Attorneys,for example, are not allowed to post a listing of their clients, unless each clients has given permission to be on the list. It is rarely in the client's best interest to have it revealed who their attorney is, and so the attorney should rarely ask to list such things. But, if an attorney is representing a person in a particular matter and if they are contacting an opposing party, then they should say who they are representing. But, this is not always the case and it depends what the situation is. For example, lawyers are allowed to act on someone's behalf and not reveal who they are working for, or even that they are working for anyone. This is often the case, especially in big real estate bargaining. However, if someone calls you for information and you are not satisfied that they have a right to know, you do not need to answer or give them any information at all. If a lawyer is representing a person and is going to discuss or negotiate on the person's behalf, they will let you know they are engaged to represent the person in that dealing. If there is a court case pending and a lawyer is officially representing a party, they will put their name on the court filings, and will often send letter saying whom they represent. Often, a lawyer may seek information on behalf of a client, but not want to reveal for whom they work. It is up to you to decide whether you wish to give such a person information. The one main thing a lawyer cannot do is lie and say they represent someone they do not represent. So if you ask a lawyer whom they represent in the matter, if anyone, the lawyer is not allowed to falsely name someone. But, they can refuse to answer, and you can refuse to discuss with them. However, in some locations, there are special rules about a lawyer acting as a real estate agent being allow to bluff certain things. To accurately answer your question, I would need all the details.
The identity of a client is usually considered to be confidential information - so the attorney was correct in not answering your question. Usually, it is only after the client grants permission to the lawyer to reveal the relationship - then the attorney is permitted to do so.
When a case is referred, usually the first attorney will send over your entire file to the new attorney. Because both the old and new lawyers are on your side (and they have a pre-existing relationship), the transition can generally be easily made from one lawyer to the next.
Here are some things to keep in mind if your case is referred to a lawyer you have never met: You will probably not be paying any extra for the new attorney. When your case is referred, that generally means that your old and new attorneys will split the original fees that you had already agreed to pay.
If you can’t get ahold of your lawyer right away, try to email your lawyer or ask to speak to that attorney’s paralegal or legal assistant.
It can be a simple letter stating that you no longer require his or her legal services for your claim or case. Fire your attorney before you hire someone else. There are ethical rules that prevent lawyers from speaking to someone who already has an attorney.
Many civil injury claims have two stages: pre-lawsuit negotiation with the insurance company, and then the lawsuit itself if the parties are unable to settle.
There are plenty of civil firms who specialize in negotiation before a lawsuit is ever filed. However, if the insurance company will not settle your claim for a fair number, then a lawsuit needs to be drafted – and your case will be in better hands if it’s being handled by a lawyer with litigation expertise.
Firing an attorney will probably lead to delays in your case. Your new lawyer will need to take some time collecting records and becoming familiar with your case. Be aware that these delays are inevitable – even if they may be worth it in the long run.
Then obtain his/her contact information from the California Bar Association web site and call him/her and ask whether they represent him in the action.
An attorney has a duty of candor to both the court and the parties. While this does not require the attorney to disclose information which is harmful or prejudicial to his/her client (in fact, such communication is protected by the attorney-client privilege), the representing of a client is not privileged, especially since this information is sometimes essential to making sure that the proper procedureal...
Yes, an attorney has a duty of candor to both the court and the parties. While this does not require the attorney to disclose information which is harmful or prejudicial to his/her client (in fact, such communication is protected by the attorney-client privilege), the representing of a client is not privileged, ...