A Florida lawyer violated the ethics rules by texting his witness during a deposition, the Florida Supreme Court recently held. The court imposed an even stiffer penalty than recommended.
Just the facts, ma’am
In January 2020, the Florida Bar filed its Complaint against the lawyer for conduct during a telephone deposition in a worker’s
Under your jurisdiction’s version of Model Rule 3.4(d), you have an ethics duty to make reasonably diligent efforts to comply with legally proper discovery requests. Interpreting a wrinkle in Ohio’s version of the rule, the state supreme court held earlier this month that a violation requires “intentionally or habitually” flouting the requirement — and in an odd twist, the court held that a claimed Vitamin D deficiency did not excuse a Dayton lawyer’s failure to obey.
Continue Reading Lack of vitamin-D didn’t mitigate intentional, habitual non-compliance with discovery requests
Some ethics violations happen because a lawyer carefully analyzes a debatable situation and draws a good-faith, but incorrect, conclusion. And then there are the lawyers who leave me wondering. Let’s say your divorce client hacks into his future-former-wife’s e-mail account and hands you her payroll information and the direct examination questions that her lawyer has e-mailed her in preparation for trial. Raise your hand if you think you can use that evidence.
Continue Reading Using ill-gotten evidence and threatening opposing counsel draws 6-month suspension
Courts often analyze motions to disqualify by balancing the need to uphold professional standards against the rights of clients to choose their lawyers freely. The New Jersey court of appeals struck that balance earlier this month in upholding the disqualification of a lawyer who violated a confidentiality order, finding that the lawyer knowingly disobeyed a court order, among other violations.
Continue Reading Violating confidentiality order results in lawyer’s DQ and referral to state ethics board