Many of us have had the experience of opposing counsel copying their client on an email about the matter (and sometimes an email that takes us to task for some supposed transgression). The immediate response may be to “Reply All” and tell the lawyer (and their client) that they are wrong. Satisfying, but when you
ABA provides guidance on the “no-contact rule” for pro se lawyers
Model Rule 4.2 is often referred to as the “no-contact” rule, prohibiting lawyers from contacting represented parties regarding the subject matter of the representation without first obtaining a court order or the consent of the other party’s lawyer. Just last month, the ABA issued Formal Opinion 502, which warns pro se lawyers—that is, lawyers
Opinion from the Buckeye State; “no-contact” rule revisited
The “no contact rule” set out in Model Rule 4.2 can be a source of confusion for many lawyers. The rule prohibits a lawyer from communicating with a represented person about the subject of the representation without the consent of the other lawyer. We have discussed the rule before in the corporate context, but
No DQ for violation of no-contact rule, but notes of interview must be turned over, says district court
A federal district court refused last week to disqualify a Connecticut lawyer in a suit against Yale University, even though finding a violation of the state’s version of Model Rule 4.2, the “no contact rule.” Although ruling that disqualification was too extreme a sanction, the court ordered the turnover of interview notes from the
“No contact” rule didn’t bar interview with represented suspect, district court holds
When the government comes knocking during a grand jury investigation, can a G-man interview one of your executives without getting consent from counsel? Last month, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine said “Yes,” and refused to suppress an executive’s statements in the tax fraud case against him, holding that the ex parte chat didn’t violate ethics rules. The case shows how in a federal criminal investigation, an exception to the well-known “no-contact” rule can sweep away its protection.
Continue Reading “No contact” rule didn’t bar interview with represented suspect, district court holds
Pro se parties who are sort of not — can you communicate with them?
We’ve mentioned before that some courts look with disfavor on lawyers helping pro se litigants by ghostwriting briefs for them to file as their own. Some opinions discussing the issue frame the conduct as lawyer deceit, as misrepresentation, or even as potential contempt of court. In a related twist, the ABA ethics committee has recently