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.
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.Sep 26, 2016
b : guarded thoughts or intentions He was chary and given to keeping his own counsel. 4a plural counsel. (1) : a lawyer engaged in the trial or management of a case in court. (2) : a lawyer appointed to advise and represent in legal matters an individual client or a corporate and especially a public body.
To counsel is to provide legal advice or guidance to someone on specific subject matter. Counsel is also a lawyer giving advice about a legal matter and representing clients in court.
(A) While representing a client, a member shall not communicate directly or indirectly about the subject of the representation with a party the member knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the member has the consent of the other lawyer.
Judges and lawyers typically refer to defendants who represent themselves with the terms "pro se" (pronounced pro say) or "pro per." Both come from Latin and essentially mean "for one's own person."
(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate directly or indirectly 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.
In general, parties to a matter in litigation are free to communicate directly with each other. One rationale is that parties have a right to settle their disputes without the involvement or consent of their lawyers.
Pro se legal representation (/ˌproʊ ˈsiː/ or /ˌproʊ ˈseɪ/) comes from Latin pro se, meaning "for oneself" or "on behalf of themselves", which in modern law means to argue on one's own behalf in a legal proceeding as a defendant or plaintiff in civil cases or a defendant in criminal cases.
Counsel can refer to one lawyer or attorney or a group of lawyers or attorneys who represent a single client. Like advocate, counsel is often used in the U.S. as a synonym for lawyer or attorney, but it can also refer to a group of people.
Right to counsel means a defendant has a right to have the assistance of counsel (i.e., lawyers) and, if the defendant cannot afford a lawyer, requires that the government appoint one or pay the defendant's legal expenses. The right to counsel is generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial.
Legal Counsel are law professionals responsible to make sure that company's business is adhering to law. Legal Counsels give legal advice and monitor all applicable legal aspects.
Opinion rules that the attorney for the plaintiffs in a personal injury action arising out of a motor vehicle accident may interview the unrepresented defendant even though the uninsured motorist insurer, which has elected to defend the claim in the name of the defendant, is represented by an attorney in the matter.
Opinion rules that a lawyer may interview an unrepresented former employee of an adverse represented organization about the subject of the representation unless the former employee participated substantially in the legal representation of the organization in the matter. 97 Formal Ethics Opinion 10.
Opinion rules that a lawyer may not proffer evidence gained during a private investigator's verbal communication with an opposing party known to be represented by legal counsel unless the lawyer discloses the source of the evidence to the opposing lawyer and to the court prior to the proffer. 2004 Formal Ethics Opinion 4.
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. The Rule is not intended to discourage good faith ...
Opinion rules that a lawyer may communicate with a custodian of public records, pursuant to the North Carolina Public Records Act, for the purpose of making a request to examine public records related to the representation although the custodian is an adverse party whose lawyer does not consent to the communication. RPC 224.
Opinion rules that a lawyer who is appointed the guardian ad litem for a minor plaintiff in a tort action and is represented in this capacity by legal counsel, must be treated by opposing counsel as a represented party and , therefore, direct contact with the guardian ad litem, without consent of counsel, is prohibited.
By Martin I. Kaminsky (Greenberg Traurig) and Maren J. Messing (Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler)
The starting point is Rule 4.2 (a) of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct (NYRPC).
The Rule applies regardless of how the possible communication arises. It does not matter if the other party initiates it, requests it, consents to it or tells the lawyer he/she does not feel the need to have his lawyer included.
Rule 4.2 prohibits contact when a lawyer “knows” that a person is represented by counsel. NYRPC Rule 4.2. It does not say “has reason to know;” and Rule 1.0 (k) defines knowledge as “actual knowledge of the fact in question.” NYRPC Rule 1.0 (k).
Failure to adhere to the no-contact rule can have serious consequences for counsel, as well as for her client. Disciplinary authorities have full power to act in response as they deem warranted by the nature and extent of the violation of Rules of Professional Conduct. See, e.g., In re Matthew B. Murray, 2013 WL 5630414, No.
The contact rule only governs communications with represented persons about the subject matter for which they are represented.
Rule 4.2 of the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides: "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 by law to do so by law or a court order." (2002). Department attorneys should be aware that Comment 5 to Model Rule 4.2 provides that " [t]he 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." Although the rule may vary from state to state, each state has adopted a rule of professional conduct that governs communications with represented persons. Department attorneys should be guided by the relevant state's or federal district court's rule and interpretations of that rule and should not rely exclusively on the ABA Model Rule and its interpretation in determining what is appropriate conduct, unless directed to do so by the relevant rules of professional conduct. Nonetheless, as a general matter, it may be useful to review ABA Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility Formal Opinion 95-396, "Communications with Represented Persons" (July 24, 1995), and the Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct published by the ABA Center for Professional Responsibility.
A lawyer who represents a person or entity cannot assert a blanket representation by which that lawyer purports to represent the person or entity on all subjects and all matters. The rule does not govern communications with a represented person concerning matters outside the representation.
Many states' contacts rules do not prohibit contact with former employees of a represented organization; however, even when communicating with former employees is permissible, the discussion should not include attorney-client privileged information.
By Martin I. Kaminsky (Greenberg Traurig LLP) and Maren J. Messing (Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP)
N.Y. Rule 4.2 (a) is clear that a lawyer may not speak about the matter at issue directly with an individual who the lawyer knows is represented by counsel concerning that matter. But, application of the Rule becomes less clear when the other party is a corporation or other entity.
In New York, former employees are not covered by the No-Contact Rule. Comment 7 to N.Y. Rule 4.2 expressly states that “ [c]onsent of the organization’s lawyer is not required for communication with a former constituent.” Accord Muriel Siebert, 8 N.Y.3d at 506; ABA Comm. on Ethics & Prof. Responsibility, Formal Op. 359 (1991).
Protection of privilege and confidentiality is an important purpose of the No-Contact Rule. Therefore, even when a lawyer is permitted to contact an employee of an entity, the lawyer must be careful what information to seek or accept.
The second part of Rule 4.2, expressly authorizes a lawyer to advise his or her client to communicate directly with the client’s adversary or any other person represented by counsel provided that “the lawyer gives reasonable advance notice to the represented person’s counsel.” NYRPC Rule 4.2 (b) (2009).
The rapid and extensive explosion of social media has invited interest in such platforms as a means to obtain helpful information or even evidence. At the same time, that has spawned questions about whether accessing and using information in or from social media violates the No-Contact Rule.