Download - G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
1/22
Ethics Case Analysis
Lake Pleasant Bodies Case (A)
Submitted By:
Group #6
March 2, 1999
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
2/22
Background
Attorney Frank Armani has been assigned by a district court in the State of New York to
defend Robert Garrow, a convicted rapist and suspected child molester, for the murder of
an eighteen year-old camper in the Adirondack Mountains near Lake Pleasant, New
York. Mr. Armani had provided advice to Mr. Garrow on three previous occasions, a
minor auto accident and a charge of unlawful imprisonment and possession of a
dangerous drug, which were later dismissed. In addition, Mr. Armani had been retained
by Garrow to defend him for allegedly molesting two young girls. Mr. Garrow never
appeared for trial and shortly thereafter was identified as the murderer of the camper near
Lake Pleasant.
Investigators suspected that Garrow was also responsible for the murder of Daniel Porter
and the disappearance of Susan Petz, two campers in the same area. Authorities believed
that Susan Petz could still be alive and wanted Garrow to reveal her whereabouts.
Garrow was finally located, and while being apprehended by police was shot several
times. Before going into surgery, Garrow requested that Armani defend him on the
murder charge and from that point forward refused to talk with anyone else.
Armani was reluctant to accept the case because of Garrows background and his own
lack of criminal defense experience; however, he felt an obligation to meet with Garrow
in the hospital. The police asked Armani to let them know if Garrow revealed anything
about Susan Petzs whereabouts. Garrow was unwilling to talk to Armani about any of
the murders and denied killing anyone. Garrow did not have the resources to hire a
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
3/22
private attorney. The court appointed Armani to defend Garrow because of their on-
going relationship, despite Armanis lack of murder defense experience. Armani asked
his friend Francis Belge, an experienced criminal defense attorney, to help in the defense
of Garrow. Belge initially refused, but later agreed to be co-counsel.
Garrow still refused to be forthcoming with information for his defense or to admit
murdering anyone. Armani persuaded Garrow to submit to hypnosis, during which he
planted suggestions that Garrow should cooperate fully during an afternoon interview.
During the afternoon interview Garrow described killing a young lady named Alicia
Hauck, as well as killing Porter and Petz. Garrow also described where he hid the bodies
of Petz and Hauck. However, Garrow denied involvement in any other crimes, including
the murder of the original camper for which he was being held.
Belge and Armani confirmed Garrows story by locating Petzs body in an abandoned
mine shaft. Belge later located Haucks body in the vicinity of where Garrow had
described. Belge and Garrow believed they could not tell anyone of their findings
because of the legal and ethical responsibilities involved in the attorney-client privilege.
Susan Petzs father has now come to see Armani in an attempt to get information
regarding the whereabouts of his daughter.
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
4/22
Issues
The primary ethical issue facing Frank Armani is whether or not to tell Susan Petzs
father where his daughters body is located. Withholding the information from Mr. Petz
would be a violation of Armanis personal ethics and emotions. Armani wants to give the
Petz family closure regarding the welfare of their daughter. Armani feels empathetic
toward the Petz family because his own parents suffered pain when his younger brother
disappeared over the North Sea and the body was never recovered. Armani imagines
how he would feel and that he would want to know the outcome if it were his daughter.
However, by disclosing the location of the body, Armani would violate the attorney-
client privilege and the ethical duty of confidentiality to his client.
The attorney-client privilege is the oldest of the testimonial privileges protecting
confidential communications (Internet 1). Generally the privilege covers legal advice,
and guidance and communications between the lawyer and the client. While the privilege
belongs to the client, it is the attorneys ethical responsibility to be the guardian of the
clients privilege. In New York, where this case is located, the attorney-client privilege,
which is codified in C.P.L.R. 4503, is broader in scope than the federal common-law
standard in that the privilege applies when an attorneys communication is made to
render legal advice or services to the client (Internet 2). The federal standard defines the
privilege only for communication containing confidential client information.
Canon 4 of the American Bar Association Model Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that a lawyer should preserve the confidences and secrets of a client (Cannon
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
5/22
95). Information that the client has requested be kept confidential or information that
would be detrimental to the clients case are covered by this Code. The client must
consent to the disclosure of the confidential or detrimental information.
There are four conditions under which the Code allows confidentiality to be broken:
Client Consent
When Required by the Model Code, law, or court order
To prevent the commission of a crime
To establish or collect a fee or to defend against an accusation of wrongful conduct.
Armani should consider these conditions when formulating his ethical and legal position
on the issues.
The essence of the privilege is that an attorney cannot give the best legal advice to the
client without being fully informed of all the facts. A client may be reluctant to talk
freely if there is fear that the attorney would disclose the information. As was ruled in
Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 403 (1976), As a practical matter, if the client
knows that damaging information could more readily be obtained from the attorney
following disclosure than from himself in the absence of disclosure, the client would be
reluctant to confide in his lawyer and it would be difficult to obtain fully informed legal
advice.
Ethical Theories
There are several theories explaining the origin of ethics and moral standards. Positive
law, natural law, moral relativism, and religious beliefs are among these theories
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
6/22
(Jennings 41). Positive law states that ethical decisions are based upon whether or not a
particular action is legal. If the action is legal, then it is ethical. Natural law is the theory
that some universal code governs our behavior and that this code applies to everyone.
Natural law does not consider whether the action is legal or not. A third way to assess
ethics is to consider the situation. Moral relativism bases morality and ethics on the
circumstances of a particular decision. For example, stealing may be ethically correct if
the situation justifies the thievery. Finally, religious beliefs are a way to explain ethical
and moral conduct. Writings such as the Bible and the Koran serve to guide many people
in their decisions of right and wrong.
The three most frequently used theories of ethical decision making are Egoism,
Deontology, and Utilitarianism. Simply put, Ethical Egoism is the idea that we should
always act selfishly (Internet 3). A true egoist does not believe in laws or moral codes,
unless these laws and codes support the egoists self-interest. As described by John
Beverley Robinson in his essay Egoism, egoism is the realization by the individual
that he is above all institutions and all formulas; that they exist only so far as he chooses
to make them his own by accepting them (Internet 4). If Frank Armani were an egoist,
he would inform Daniel Petz of the location of Petzs daughter. The sole reason Armani
would relate information about Petzs daughter is because Armani wants to tell Petz.
This decision is purely selfish and is made irrespective of the ethical code of his
profession.
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
7/22
Deontology is the belief that the rightness and wrongness of actions does not depend
entirely on considerations of goodness (Internet 5). Instead, decisions are made based
on the individuals personal moral code. This moral code may or may not be based on
generally accepted principles of law and ethics. Under deontology, an individual would
always make the same decision in all situations. The decision would be based on a sense
of obligation (Internet 6). If Frank Armani were a deontologist, he would most likely
inform Petz as to the location of Petzs missing daughter. Armani would ignore the
ethical code of his profession and would follow his own personal moral code.
Considering that Armani had a brother who was missing in action in Asia, he can
empathize with the suffering that Mr. Petz is experiencing. This empathy would drive
Armanis moral decision to tell.
The final theory to be discussed is Utilitarianism. This theory emphasizes happiness-
producing consequences (Internet 6). Behaviors that produce happiness for the majority
are supported. A subset of utilitarianism, called Rule Utilitarianism, states that if a
small and simple set of rules are followed by everyone, then the maximum benefit would
insue in the long run (Internet 6). Ethical codes of conduct, such as those of the New
York State Bar Association, serve to enforce rule utilitarianism. Therefore, under this
doctrine, Armani would not disclose any information to Mr. Petz. Instead, Armani would
uphold the standards of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality.
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
8/22
Alternatives and Consequences
Armani has two primary alternatives: to tell Mr. Petz where his daughter can be found or
to uphold the legal rule of attorney-client privilege and the ethical rule of confidentiality.
Both of these alternatives have positive and negative consequences affecting Armani,
Garrow, Belge, the Petz family, the Lake Pleasant community, and the legal system as a
whole.
Scenario 1
Mr. Armani divulges the whereabouts and condition of Susan Petz to her father. By
choosing this alternative Armani knowingly and deliberately violates the legal and ethical
rules of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality; however, there are considerable
positive consequences to taking this course of action. Although the news may be
horrifying to Mr. Petz, at least he knows what has happened to his daughter and can take
appropriate action to have her properly buried and begin the mourning process. In
addition, the police and the local Lake Pleasant community can discontinue the search for
Susan Petz, saving valuable time and community resources. Armani feels good on a
personal level as a father, because he would have wanted information if it had been his
daughter. Lastly, a positive aspect for the community is that Garrow could be charged
with the murder of Susan Petz and possibly convicted.
By choosing to tell Mr. Petz the whereabouts of his daughter, Armani risks substantial
negative consequences on a personal level, as well as on a legal and social level. By
violating the rules of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality Armani is likely to
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
9/22
receive sanctions from the Bar Association, with the possibility of being disbarred,
thereby ending his career as an attorney. In addition, his law firm may be negatively
impacted by the turmoil experienced while Armani is under review by the legal system.
The firm may lose business because potential clients will question whether their
confidential information and communications will be respected. Not only is Armanis
firm affected, but so is Mr. Belge who specifically counseled Armani against divulging
the information. Belge may also lose business through his association with Armani as
co-counsel. Therefore, not only does Armani risk losing his own career, his actions could
affect the careers of his colleagues.
Garrow and the legal system could suffer additional negative impacts. On one hand,
Garrows rights would be violated and he would most likely be charged with the murder
of Susan Petz. On the other hand, it is also possible that Garrow could be acquitted of the
murder or he could receive a mistrial due to the improper disclosure and faulty legal
representation by Armani. If Garrow was also acquitted of the murder of the first
camper, he could possibly go free, which would have the greatest negative impact on the
community.
Scenario 2
Mr. Armani does not divulge the confidential information learned from Garrow. As
under Scenario 1, there are both negative and positive consequences if Armani decides to
abide by the rules of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality. Obviously, Mr. Petz is
negatively affected by Armanis decision to withhold the information regarding his
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
10/22
daughter. Mr. Petz will continue to wonder whether his daughter is alive or dead and the
Lake Pleasant community will continue to expend considerable resources to search for
Susan Petz. Another negative effect is the personal impact on Armani. He must fight the
personal urge to divulge the information, which seems to go against his moral standards.
Armani may feel extreme guilt regarding his decision. In addition, it is likely that the
community would react negatively against Armani if they were to find out he withheld
the information.
There are several positive results if Armani chooses not to tell Mr. Petz the information
regarding his daughter. Individually, Armani is unlikely to face sanctions from the legal
community and he preserves his relationships with his law firm and Belge. More
importantly, Armani upholds the ethical and legal standards of the legal profession by
preserving the attorney-client privilege and rules of confidentiality. Garrow has the right
to counsel and due process, both of which would be compromised if Armani were to
violate Garrows confidence.
Conclusion/Recommendation
The recommendation is that Frank Armani follow the Utilitarian theory of ethical
decision making and maintain his clients confidentiality for the greater good of society.
Therefore, Armani will not reveal any information that violates the attorney-client
privilege. With the assistance of his co-council Frank Belge, Armani is familiar with the
canons of the New York State Bar Association Code of Professional Responsibility (see
Appendix A). Canon 4 of the code: A Lawyer Should Preserve the Confidences and
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
11/22
Secrets of a Client, clearly states that informing the families would be a violation of
Disciplinary Rule (DR) 4-101 [1200.19]. For personal reasons, it will be very difficult
for Armani not to ease the minds of the Petz family. However, his solace is the
preservation of the U.S. criminal justice system and the balance and safety it instills in
our society. The first line of the aforementioned code states: The continued existence of
the free and democratic society depends upon recognition of the concept that justice is
based upon the rule of law grounded in respect for the dignity of the individual and the
capacity of the individual through reason for enlightened self-government (Internet 7).
Armani must support the justice system and uphold the code.
Canon 4 of the code outlines the rights of the client to privacy, and this right is automatic.
The lawyer must get the client to waive the right to allow disclosure. The lawyer cannot
disclose information without the clients consent. According to the utilitarian theory of
ethics, convincing the client to provide the information about the crimes will support the
greater good of all: the family of the victim, the criminal justice system, and the client
himself. Armani should try to convince his client to allow the disclosure of the location
of the bodies. Armani has two arguments to help persuade his client to disclose this
information: 1) to reinforce the insanity defense, and 2) to assist in potential plea-
bargains. In addition by Garrow disclosing the information, Armani would be able to
uphold the Bar Association Code of ethics.
Armani had a legitimate need to find out all of the details of his clients crimes.
Although he utilized questionable ethics by planting suggestions to obtain more
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
12/22
information while Garrow was under hypnosis, Armani was mounting an insanity defense
that could be bolstered with details of additional crimes. In order to support that defense,
according to the criminal procedure laws in New York, Armani must fulfill the
requirements of Article 730 of the New York State Criminal Procedure by submitting a
report outlining the symptoms and condition of his client. Establishing the demented
pattern of destruction that Garrow was following would support this defense.
It is also a possibility that the plea-bargain process could be influenced with information
about the victim. While it is clear that Robert Garrow should be removed from society, it
is the duty of the lawyer to create the best possible defense for his client. In return for
information about Susan Petz, the district attorney might be more inclined to accept the
insanity plea. If Garrow is found to have had a mental disease or defect at the time of the
murders, he could possibly avoid life imprisonment or the death penalty, and be released
at a future time if found to be cured.
It is Armanis duty as a lawyer in the state of New York to uphold the New York Bar
Association Code. The one exception to the attorney-client privilege that applies in this
case is the knowledge of the intent of a client to commit a crime. If Garrow testifies
under oath that he did not kill Susan Petz, he will commit perjury. The seventh canon of
the Code: A Lawyer Should Represent a Client Zealously Within the Bounds of the Law,
clearly states that if the client commits a fraud, the lawyer should reveal the fraud to the
affected person or tribunal. Armani can use this argument to persuade Robert Garrow to
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
13/22
provide information about the crimes. However, this argument is moot if Garrow does
not take the stand and testify.
The Lake Pleasant Bodies Case is a complex study of one of the most important ethical
issues facing attorneys whether to maintain the attorney-client privilege of a guilty
client, even when the attorney has information that would assist the injured party in the
case. By following the tenants of Utilitarianism, and specifically Rule Utilitarianism,
Frank Armani would uphold the professional code of ethics and maintain his clients
confidentiality. In the long run, this practice benefits society as a whole by maintaining
the integrity of a critical component of the United States justice system.
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
14/22
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cannon, Therese A. Ethics and Professional Responsibility for Legal Assistants.
Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992.
Jennings, Marianne. Business: Its Legal, Ethical and Global Environment. Cincinnati:
South-Western College Publishing Co., 1997.
West, Ellen. The Lake Pleasant Bodies Case (A). Boston: Harvard Business School,
1990.
Internet 1 Chapter 1; The Attorney-Client Privilege [Online]. Available:
www.abanet.org/abapubs/5310215chap.html [1999, February 21].
Internet 2 Buzzetta, Daniel J. (1998, August 26). Sizing Up the Variable Scope of
Attorney-Client Privilege [Online]. Available:
(ljextra.com/practice/professionalresponsibility/0826acp.html) [1999, February
26].
Internet 3 Two Types of Egoism [Online]. Available:
http://ethics.acusd.edu/seattle/egoism/tsld003.htm [1999, February 23].
Internet 4 Robinson, John Beverley (No date). Egoism [Online]. Available:
http://pierce.ee.washington.edu/~davisd/egoist/articles/Egoism.Robinson.html
[1999, February 23].
Internet 5 Hubin, Donald C. (1998).Normative Ethical Theories [Online]. Available:
http://philosophy.ohio-
state.edu/people/donh/phil130/NormativeEthicalTheories/sld001.htm [1999,
February 23].
http://www.abanet.org/abapubs/5310215chap.htmlhttp://ethics.acusd.edu/seattle/egoism/tsld003.htmhttp://philosophy.ohio-state.edu/people/donh/phil130/NormativeEthicalTheories/sld001.htmhttp://philosophy.ohio-state.edu/people/donh/phil130/NormativeEthicalTheories/sld001.htmhttp://www.abanet.org/abapubs/5310215chap.htmlhttp://ethics.acusd.edu/seattle/egoism/tsld003.htmhttp://philosophy.ohio-state.edu/people/donh/phil130/NormativeEthicalTheories/sld001.htmhttp://philosophy.ohio-state.edu/people/donh/phil130/NormativeEthicalTheories/sld001.htm -
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
15/22
Internet 6 A Discussion of Deontological and Consequentialist Frameworks [Online].
Available: http://www.princeton.edu/~kenlee/pub/cs291week5.html [1999,
February 20].
Internet 7 TheNew York State Bar Association Code of Professional Responsibility
[ Online]. Available: http://www.nysba.org/opinions/codes/anchor1.html [1999,
February 26].
http://www.princeton.edu/~kenlee/pub/cs291week5.htmlhttp://www.nysba.org/opinions/codes/anchor1.htmlhttp://www.princeton.edu/~kenlee/pub/cs291week5.htmlhttp://www.nysba.org/opinions/codes/anchor1.html -
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
16/22
Appendix A
Excerpts from the New York State Bar
Association Code of Professional
Responsibility
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
17/22
Appendix A: Excerpts from The New York State Bar Association
Code of Professional Responsibility
Adopted by the New York State Bar Association Effective January 1, 1970
As Amended Effective May 22, 1996
Table of Contents
* PREAMBLE
* DEFINITIONS* [1200.1]**
* CANON 1 A Lawyer Should Assist in Maintaining the Integrity
and Competence of the Legal Profession
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 2 A Lawyer Should Assist the Legal Profession in
Fulfilling Its Duty to Make Legal Counsel Available
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 3 A Lawyer Should Assist in Preventing the
Unauthorized Practice of Lawo Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 4 A Lawyer Should Preserve the Confidences and Secrets
of a Client
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 5 A Lawyer Should Exercise Independent Professional
Judgment on Behalf of a Client
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 6 A Lawyer Should Represent a Client Competently
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 7 A Lawyer Should Represent a Client Zealously Within
the Bounds of the Law
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 8 A Lawyer Should Assist in Improving the Legal System
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
CANON 9 A Lawyer Should Avoid Even the Appearance ofProfessional Impropriety
o Ethical considerations
o Disciplinary rules
o Advice on Ethical Questions
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
18/22
CANON 4: A Lawyer Should Preserve the Confidences and Secrets of a
Client
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
* EC 4-1 Both the fiduciary relationship existing between lawyer and
client and the proper functioning of the legal system require the
preservation by the lawyer of confidences and secrets of one who
has employed or sought to employ the lawyer. A client must feel
free to discuss anything with his or her lawyer and a lawyer must
be equally free to obtain information beyond that volunteered by
the client. A lawyer should be fully informed of all the facts of
the matter being handled in order for the client to obtain the
full advantage of our legal system. It is for the lawyer in the
exercise of independent professional judgment to separate the
relevant and important from the irrelevant and unimportant. The
observance of the ethical obligation of a lawyer to hold
inviolate the confidences and secrets of a client not only
facilitates the full development of f acts essential to
proper representation of the client but also encourages non-
lawyers to seek early legal assistance.* EC 4-2 The obligation to protect confidences and secrets obviously
does not preclude a lawyer from revealing information when the
client consents after full disclosure, when necessary to perform
the lawyer's professional employment, when permitted by a
Disciplinary Rule, or when required by law. Unless the client
otherwise directs, a lawyer may disclose the affairs of the
client to partners or associates of his or her firm. It is a
matter of common knowledge that the normal operation of a law
office exposes confidential professional information to non-
lawyer employees of the office, particularly secretaries and
those having access to the files; and this obligates a lawyer to
exercise care in selecting and training employees so that the
sanctity of all confidences and secrets of clients may be
preserved. If the obligation extends to two or more clients as to
the same information, a lawyer should obtain the permission of
all before revealing the information. A lawyer must always be
sensitive to the rights and wishes of the client and act
scrupulously in the making of decisions which may involve the
disclosure of information obtained in the professional
relationship. Thus, in the absence of consent of the client after
full disclosure, a lawyer should not associate another lawyer in
the handling of a matter; nor should the lawyer, in the absence
of consent, seek counsel from another lawyer if there is a reason
able possibility that the identity of the client or the client's
confidences or secrets would be revealed to such lawyer. Both
social amenities and professional duty should cause a lawyer to
shun indiscreet conversations concerning clients.* EC 4-3 Unless the client otherwise directs, it is not improper for a
lawyer to give limited information to an outside agency necessary
for statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data processing,
banking, printing, or other legitimate purposes, provided the
lawyer exercises due care in the selection of the agency and warns
the agency that the information must be kept confidential.
* EC 4-4 The attorney-client privilege is more limited than the ethical
obligation of a lawyer to guard the confidences and secrets of the
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
19/22
client. This ethical precept, unlike the evidentiary privilege,
exists without regard to the nature or source of information or
the fact that others share the knowledge. A lawyer should
endeavor to act in a manner which preserves the evidentiary
privilege; for example, the lawyer should avoid professional
discussions in the presence of persons to whom the privilege does
not extend. A lawyer owes an obligation to advise the client of
the attorney-client privilege and timely to assert the privilege
unless it is waived by the client.
* EC 4-5 A lawyer should not use information acquired in the course of
the representation of a client to the disadvantage of the client
and a lawyer should not use, except with the consent of the client
after full disclosure, such information for the lawyer's own
purposes. Likewise, a lawyer should be diligent in his or her
efforts to prevent the misuse of such information by employees an
d associates. Care should be exercised by a lawyer to prevent the
disclosure of the confidences and secrets of one client to
another, and no employment should b e accepted that might require
such disclosure.
* EC 4-6 The obligation to protect confidences and secrets of a client
continues after the termination of employment. A lawyer shouldalso provide for the protection of the confidences and secrets of
the client following the termination of the practice of the
lawyer, whether termination is due to death, disability, or
retirement. For example, a lawyer might provide for the personal
papers of the client to be returned to the client and for the
papers of the lawyer to be delivered to another lawyer or to be
destroyed. In determining the method of disposition, the
instructions and wishes of the client should be a dominant
consideration.
* EC 4-7 The lawyer's exercise of discretion to disclose
confidences and secrets requires consideration of a wide range of
factors and should not be subject to reexamination. A lawyer is
afforded the professional discretion to reveal the intention of a
client to commit a crime and the information necessary to prevent
the crime and cannot be subjected to discipline either for
revealing or not revealing such intention or information. In
exercising this discretion, however, the lawyer should consider
such factors as the seriousness of the potential injury to others
if the prospective crime is committed, the likelihood that it will
be committed and its imminence, the apparent absence of any other
feasible way in which the potential injury can be prevented, the
extent to which the client may have attempted to involve the
lawyer in the prospective crime, the circumstances under
which the lawyer acquired the information of the client's intent,
and any other possibly aggravating or extenuating circumstances.
In any case, a disclosure adverse to the client's interest should
be no greater than the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to thepurpose.
DISCIPLINARY RULES
DR 4-101 [1200.19] Preservation of Confidences and Secrets of a Client
A. "Confidence" refers to information protected by the attorney-client
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
20/22
privilege under applicable law, and "secret" refers to other
information gained in the professional relationship that the client has
requested be held inviolate o r the disclosure of which would be
embarrassing or would be likely to be detrimental to the client.
B. Except when permitted under DR 4-101 [1200.19] (C), a lawyer shall
not knowingly:
1. Reveal a confidence or secret of a client.
2. Use a confidence or secret of a client to the
disadvantage of the client.
3. Use a confidence or secret of a client for the
advantage of the lawyer or of a third person, unless
the client consents after full
C. A lawyer may reveal:
l. Confidences or secrets with the consent of the
client or clients affected, but only after a fulldisclosure to them.
2. Confidences or secrets when permitted under
Disciplinary Rules or required by law or court order.
3. The intention of a client to commit a crime and the
information necessary to prevent the crime.
4. Confidences or secrets necessary to establish or
collect the lawyer's fee or to defend the lawyer or his
or her employees or associates against an accusation
of wrongful conduct.
5. Confidences or secrets to the extent implicit in
withdrawing a written or oral opinion or
representation previously given by the lawyer and
believed by the lawyer still to be relied upon by a
third person where the lawyer has discovered that the
opinion or representation was based on materially
inaccurate in formation or is being used to further a
crime or fraud.
D. A lawyer shall exercise reasonable care to prevent his or her
employees, associates, and others whose services are utilized by the
lawyer from disclosing or using confidences or secrets of a client,
except that a lawyer may reveal the information allowed by DR 4-
101[1200.19](C) through an employee.
CANON 7: A Lawyer Should Represent a Client Zealously Within the Bounds
of the Law
DISCIPLINARY RULES
DR 7-101 [1200.32] Representing a Client Zealously.
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
21/22
A. A lawyer shall not intentionally:
1. Fail to seek the lawful objectives of the client through
reasonably available means permitted by law and the
Disciplinary Rules, except as provided by DR 7-101 [1200.32]
(B). A lawyer does not violate this Disciplinary Rule,
however, by acceding to reasonable requests of opposing
counsel which do not prejudice the rights of the client, by
being punctual in fulfilling all professional commitments,
by avoiding offensive tactics, or by treating with courtesy
and consideration all persons involved in the legal process.
2. Fail to carry out a contract of employment entered into with
a client for professional services, but the lawyer may
withdraw as permitted under DR 2-110 [1200.15], DR 5-102
[1200.21], and DR 5-105 [1200.24].
3. Prejudice or damage the client during the course of the
professional relationship, except as required under DR 7-102
[1200.33] (B).
B. In the representation of a client, a lawyer may:
1. Where permissible, exercise professional judgment to waive
or fail to assert a right or position of the client.
2. Refuse to aid or participate in conduct that the lawyer
believes to be unlawful, even though there is some support
for an argument that the conduct is legal.
DR 7-102 [1200.33] Representing a Client Within the Bounds of the Law.
A. In the representation of a client, a lawyer shall not:
1. File a suit, assert a position, conduct a defense, delay a
trial, or take other action on behalf of the client when the
lawyer knows or when it is obvious that such action would
serve merely to harass or maliciously injure another.
2. Knowingly advance a claim or defense that is unwarranted
under existing law, except that the lawyer may advance such
claim or defense if it can be supported by good faith
argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of
existing law.
3. Conceal or knowingly fail to disclose that which the lawyer
is required by law to reveal.
4. Knowingly use perjured testimony or false evidence.
5. Knowingly make a false statement of law or fact.
6. Participate in the creation or preservation of evidence when
the lawyer knows or it is obvious that the evidence is
false.7. Counsel or assist the client in conduct that the lawyer
knows to be illegal or fraudulent.
8. Knowingly engage in other illegal conduct or conduct
contrary to a Disciplinary Rule.
B. A lawyer who receives information clearly establishing that:
1. The client has, in the course of the representation,
perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal shall promptly
-
7/29/2019 G2-6 Lake Pl. Bodies
22/22
call upon the client to rectify the same, and if the client
refuses or is unable to do so, the lawyer shall reveal the
fraud to the affected person or tribunal, except when the
information is protected as a confidence or secret.
2. A person other than the client has perpetrated a fraud upon
a tribunal shall promptly reveal the fraud to the tribunal.
DR 7-103 [1200.34] Performing the Duty of Public Prosecutor or Other
Government Lawyer.
A. A public prosecutor or other government lawyer shall not institute
or cause to be instituted criminal charges when he or she knows or it
is obvious that the charges are not supported by probable cause.
B. A public prosecutor or other government lawyer in criminal
litigation shall make timely disclosure to counsel for the defendant,
or to a defendant who has no counsel, of the existence of evidence,
known to the prosecutor or other government lawyer, that tends to
negate the guilt of the accused, mitigate the degree of the offense or
reduce the punishment.
Copyright (c)1996, New York State Bar Association. All rights
reserved. The NYSBA logo is a trademark of the New York State Bar
Association.