Contents

Table of Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxix

Preface to the Fourth Edition for Teachers and Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxiii
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxix
A Note to Students About Updates to This Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlix

Introduction 1
A. Ethics, morals, and professionalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B. Some central themes in this book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Conflicts of interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
2. Truthfulness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
3. Lawyers’ duties to clients versus their duties to the justice
system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
4. Lawyers’ personal and professional interests versus their
fiduciary obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
5. Self-interest as a theme in regulation of lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
6. Lawyers as employees: Institutional pressures on ethical
judgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
7. The changing legal profession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
C. The structure of this book. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
D. The rules quoted in this book: A note on sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
E. Stylistic decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Chapter 1: The Regulation of Lawyers 19

A. Institutions that regulate lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1. The highest state courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
a. The responsibility of “self-regulation” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
b. The inherent powers doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2. State and local bar associations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
3. Lawyer disciplinary agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
xiii
xiv Contents

4. American Bar Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

5. American Law Institute. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
6. Federal and state courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
7. Legislatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
8. Administrative agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
9. Prosecutors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
10. Malpractice insurers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
11. Law firms and other employers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
12. Clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
B. State ethics codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
C. Admission to practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
1. A short history of bar admission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
2. Contemporary bar admission requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43
3. The bar examination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
Problem 1-1: The New Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4. The character and fitness inquiry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46
a. Criteria for evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
b. Filling out the character questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Problem 1-2: Weed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
c. Mental health of applicants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
d. Law school discipline: A preliminary screening process . . . . . . . . . 61
Problem 1-3: The Doctored Resume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Chapter 2: Lawyer Liability 65

A. Professional discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
1. History and process of lawyer discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
2. Grounds for discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
Problem 2-1: The Dying Mother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Problem 2-2: “I’m Not Driving” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3. Reporting misconduct by other lawyers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90
a. The duty to report misconduct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Problem 2-3: Exculpatory Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
b. Lawyers’ responsibility for ethical misconduct by colleagues
and superiors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Problem 2-4: The Little Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
c. Legal protections for subordinate lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Case study: The strange tale of Scott McKay Wolas . . . . . . . 108
Kelly v. Hunton & Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
B. Civil liability of lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
1. Legal malpractice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120
2. Malpractice insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .125
 Contents xv

3. Other civil liability of lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127

a. Liability for breach of contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
b. Liability for violation of regulatory statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
4. Disqualification for conflicts of interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .128
C. Criminal liability of lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
D. Client protection funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
E. Summing up: The law governing lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Chapter 3: The Duty to Protect Client Confidences 141

A. The basic principle of confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
1. Protection of “information relating to the representation
of a client” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .142
Problem 3-1: Your Dinner with Anna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
2. Protection of information if there is a reasonable prospect
of harm to a client’s interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149
3. The bottom line on informal communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .150
4. Additional cautions about protecting client confidences. . . . . . . . . . .151
B. Exceptions to the duty to protect confidences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
1. Revelation of past criminal conduct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .158
Case study: The missing persons: The defense of
Robert Garrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
Problem 3-2: The Missing Persons, Scene 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Problem 3-3: The Missing Persons, Scene 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
The real case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
The Belge case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
People v. Belge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
People v. Belge (appeal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Problem 3-4: The Missing Persons, Scene 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
2. The risk of future injury or death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170
Problem 3-5: Rat Poison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
3. Client frauds and crimes that cause financial harm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .175
a. Ethics rules allowing revelation of client crimes or
frauds to prevent, mitigate, or remedy harm to others. . . . . . . . . . 175
b. Enron and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Recent developments in the implementation of
Sarbanes-Oxley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Problem 3-6: Reese’s Leases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
4. Revealing confidences to obtain advice about legal ethics. . . . . . . . . .188
5. Using a client’s confidential information to protect the
lawyer’s interests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .188
6. Revealing confidences to comply with a court order or
other law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .191
xvi Contents

7. Revealing confidences to prevent certain conflicts of interest . . . . . .191

C. Use or disclosure of confidential information for personal gain
or to benefit another client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Problem 3-7: An Investment Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
D. Talking to clients about confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

Chapter 4: The Attorney-Client Privilege and the

Work Product Doctrine 197
A. Confidentiality and attorney-client privilege compared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
1. Ethics law versus evidence law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .199
2. Difference in scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .201
3. Different methods of enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .201
4. When attorney-client privilege is invoked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .202
5. Why study a rule of evidence in a professional responsibility
course?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .203
6. Source of the privilege. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .203
B. The elements of attorney-client privilege . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
1. Communication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .204
2. Privileged persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .204
3. Communication in confidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .206
4. Communication for the purpose of seeking legal assistance. . . . . . . .207
C. Client identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
D. Waiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
1. Waiver by the client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .213
2. Waiver by the lawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .214
3. Waiver by putting privileged communication into issue . . . . . . . . . . .216
4. Waiver as to a conversation by disclosure of part of it . . . . . . . . . . . . .216
5. Compliance with court orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .216
Problem 4-1: Murder for Hire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
E. The crime-fraud exception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
1. No privilege if a client seeks assistance with a crime or fraud. . . . . . .219
2. Procedure for challenging a claim of privilege . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .223
3. The potential importance of privilege claims in litigation. . . . . . . . . .223
F. Revelations permitted or required by the ethics codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
G. The death of the client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .225
Problem 4-2: A Secret Confession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
2. The suicide of Vincent Foster. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .227
a. Factual background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
b. The Supreme Court evaluates the privilege claim. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
Swidler & Berlin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
 Contents xvii

H. The work product doctrine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230

1. Work product prepared in anticipation of litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .230
2. Origins of the work product rule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .230
3. Materials not created or collected in anticipation of litigation . . . . . .231
4. A qualified protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .231
5. Protection of a lawyer’s “mental impressions” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .232
6. Protection of work product, not underlying information . . . . . . . . . .232
7. Expert witnesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .233
I. The attorney-client privilege for corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
1. The Upjohn case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .233
2. Governmental requests for waiver of privilege . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .235
Problem 4-3: Worldwide Bribery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
J. The attorney-client privilege for government officials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

Chapter 5: Relationships Between Lawyers

and Clients 239
A. Formation of the lawyer-client relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
1. Lawyer discretion in selection of clients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .240
2. Offering advice as the basis for a lawyer-client relationship . . . . . . . .246
Togstad v. Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
B. Lawyers’ responsibilities as agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
1. Express and implied authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .254
2. Apparent authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .255
3. Authority to settle litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .256
C. Lawyers’ duties of competence, honesty, communication,
and diligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
1. Competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .257
Problem 5-1: The Washing Machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
2. Competence in criminal cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .261
a. Strickland v. Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
b. The aftermath of Strickland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
Problem 5-2: A Desire to Investigate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
3. Diligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .274
4. Candor and communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .275
a. Is it ever okay to lie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
b. Lying versus deception: Is there a moral distinction?. . . . . . . . . . . 277
c. Truth versus truthfulness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
d. Honesty and communication under the ethics rules . . . . . . . . . . . 278
e. Civil liability for dishonesty to clients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
5. Candor in counseling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .282
Problem 5-3: Torture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
xviii Contents

6. Duties imposed by contract in addition to those imposed

by the ethics codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .286
7. Contractual reduction of a lawyer’s duties: Client waiver
of certain lawyer duties and “unbundled legal services” . . . . . . . . . . .287
8. Contractual modification of a lawyer’s duties:
Collaborative law practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .291
D. Who calls the shots?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
1. The competent adult client. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .293
Jones v. Barnes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .297
2. Clients with diminished capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .301
a. Clients who may have mental impairments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
Problem 5-4: The Package Bomber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
Problem 5-5: Vinyl Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
Problem 5-6: Tightening the Knot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
b. Juveniles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Frances Gall Hill, Clinical Education and the
“Best Interest” Representation of Children in
Custody Disputes: Challenges and Opportunities
in Lawyering and Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
Problem 5-7: The Foster Child . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
E. Terminating a lawyer-client relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320
1. Duties to the client at the conclusion of the relationship. . . . . . . . . . .320
Problem 5-8: The Candid Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
2. Grounds for termination before the work is completed. . . . . . . . . . . .324
a. When the client fires the lawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
b. When continued representation would involve unethical
conduct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
c. When the lawyer wants to terminate the relationship . . . . . . . . . . 325
d. Matters in litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
e. When the client stops paying the fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
f. When the case imposes an unreasonable financial burden
on the lawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
g. When the client will not cooperate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
3. Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .328

Chapter 6: Conflicts of Interest: Current Clients 329

A. An introduction to conflicts of interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330
1. Why the study of conflicts is difficult . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .333
2. How the conflicts chapters are organized. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .335
3. How the conflicts rules are organized. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .336
 Contents xix

B. General principles in evaluating concurrent conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337

1. Rule 1.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .337
a. Direct adversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
b. Material limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
2. How to evaluate conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .341
3. Nonconsentable conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .341
a. The lawyer’s reasonable belief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
b. Representation prohibited by law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
c. Suing one client on behalf of another client. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
4. Informed consent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .344
5. Withdrawal and disqualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .349
Problem 6-1: The Injured Passengers, Scene 1 . . . . . . . . . . . 351
6. Imputation of concurrent conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .352
Problem 6-2: Food Poisoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
C. Conflicts between current clients in litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
1. Suing a current client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .356
Problem 6-3: I Thought You Were My Lawyer! . . . . . . . . . . 358
2. Cross-examining a current client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .359
3. Representation of co-plaintiffs or co-defendants in civil
litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .360
Problem 6-4: The Injured Passengers, Scene 2 . . . . . . . . . . . 364
4. Representing economic competitors in unrelated matters . . . . . . . . .364
5. Conflicts in public interest litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .365
Problem 6-5: The Prisoners’ Dilemma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366
6. Positional conflicts: Taking inconsistent legal positions
in litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .367
Problem 6-6: Top Gun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369
D. Conflicts involving prospective clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370
Problem 6-7: The Secret Affair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374

Chapter 7: Current Client Conflicts in Particular

Practice Settings 377
A. Representing both parties to a transaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
B. Representing organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382
1. Who is the client?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .385
2. Representing the entity and employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .387
3. Duty to protect confidences of employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .388
4. Responding to unlawful conduct by corporate officers and
other employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .388
5. Entity lawyers on boards of directors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .389
Problem 7-1: A Motion to Disqualify . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390
xx Contents

Problem 7-2: My Client’s Subsidiary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391

C. Representing co-defendants in criminal cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
1. Costs and benefits of joint representation of co-defendants . . . . . . . .393
2. Ethics rules and the Sixth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .395
Problem 7-3: Police Brutality, Scene 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
Problem 7-4: Police Brutality, Scene 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
Problem 7-5: Police Brutality, Scene 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
D. Representing co-defendants in civil cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
Problem 7-6: Termination of Parental Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
E. Representing family members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
1. Representing both spouses in a divorce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .408
2. Representing family members in estate planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .409
Florida Bar Opinion 95-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
Problem 7-7: Representing the McCarthys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411
F. Representing insurance companies and insured persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
Problem 7-8: Two Masters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
G. Representing employers and immigrant employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
H. Representing plaintiffs in class actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
I. Representing parties to aggregate settlements of individual cases . . . . . . 423

Chapter 8: Conflicts Involving Former Clients 427

A. Nature of conflicts between present and former clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428
B. Duties to former clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430
C. Distinguishing present and former clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432
D. Evaluating successive conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
1. The same matter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .436
2. Substantial relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .437
An example of substantial relationship analysis:
Westinghouse v. Gulf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
3. Material adversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .447
Problem 8-1: Keeping in Touch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
E. Addressing former client conflicts in practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
Problem 8-2: Toxic Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451
F. Representing the competitor of a former client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
The Maritrans case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
G. Conflicts between the interests of a present client and a client
who was represented by a lawyer’s former firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455
1. Analyzing former firm conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .457
2. Using or revealing a former client’s confidences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .458
H. Imputation of former client conflicts to affiliated lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460
Problem 8-3: A Brief Consultation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 470
Problem 8-4: The Fatal Shot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473
 Contents xxi

Chapter 9: Conflicts Between Lawyers and Clients 477

A. Legal fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
1. Lawyer-client fee contracts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .479
a. Types of fee agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
b. Reasonable fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
Matter of Fordham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485
c. Communication about fee arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488
Problem 9-1: An Unreasonable Fee? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490
d. Modification of fee agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Problem 9-2: Rising Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
2. Regulation of hourly billing and billing for expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . .493
Patrick J. Schiltz, On Being a Happy, Healthy, and Ethical
Member of an Unhappy, Unhealthy, and Unethical
Profession. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .496
Lisa G. Lerman, Scenes from a Law Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .508
3. Contingent fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .514
a. In general . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
b. Criminal and domestic relations cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 520
4. Forbidden and restricted fee and expense arrangements. . . . . . . . . . .522
a. Buying legal claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522
b. Financial assistance to a client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
Problem 9-3: An Impoverished Client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
c. Publication rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524
d. Advance payment of fees and nonrefundable retainer fees . . . . . . 525
5. Fee disputes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .527
a. Prospective limitations of lawyers’ liability and settlement
of claims against lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527
b. Fee arbitration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530
c. Collection of fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531
d. Fees owed to a lawyer who withdraws or is fired before
the matter is completed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534
6. Dividing fees with other firms or with nonlawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .534
a. Division of fees between lawyers not in the same firm . . . . . . . . . 534
b. Sharing fees with nonlawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537
7. Payment of fees by a third party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .538
B. Lawyer as custodian of client property and documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539
1. Client trust accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .539
2. Responsibility for client property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .540
a. Prompt delivery of funds or property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 540
b. Disputes about money or property in lawyer’s possession . . . . . . 541
c. Lawyers’ responsibilities to clients’ creditors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541
3. Administering estates and trusts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .542
xxii Contents

C. Conflicts with lawyers’ personal or business interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543

1. In general . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .543
2. Business transactions between lawyer and client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .544
3. Gifts from clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .549
4. Sexual relationships with clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .550
5. Intimate or family relationships with adverse lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . .553
6. Imputation of lawyer-client conflicts to other lawyers in a firm. . . . .553
a. Financial interest conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
b. General rule on imputation of conflicts with a lawyer’s
interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553

Chapter 10: Conflicts Issues for Government

Lawyers and Judges 555
A. Regulation of government lawyers and those who lobby them . . . . . . . . . 556
1. The law governing lobbying: An introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .556
2. Conflict of interest and “revolving door” statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .558
B. Successive conflicts of former and present government lawyers . . . . . . . . 560
1. Conflicts of former government lawyers in private practice . . . . . . . .561
a. What is a “matter”? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562
b. Personal and substantial participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563
c. Screening of former government lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565
d. Confidential government information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566
2. Conflicts of government lawyers who formerly worked
in private practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .568
Problem 10-1: The District Attorney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569
C. Conflicts involving judges, arbitrators, and mediators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570
1. History of judicial ethics codes in the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .571
2. Overview of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .573
3. Impartiality and fairness; avoidance of bias, prejudice,
and harassment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .576
4. Ex parte communications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .580
5. Disqualification of judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .582
Problem 10-2: A Trip to Monte Carlo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 590
Problem 10-3: The Judge’s Former Professor . . . . . . . . . . . . 592
6. Conflicts rules for former judges, law clerks, arbitrators,
and mediators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .594
a. Personal and substantial participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594
b. Imputation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595
c. Employment negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595
 Contents xxiii

Chapter 11: Lawyers’ Duties to Courts 597

A. Being a good person in an adversary system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598
Stephen Gillers, Can a Good Lawyer Be a Bad Person? . . . . . . . . . . . .600
B. Investigation before filing a complaint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 601
Problem 11-1: Your Visit from Paula Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608
C. Truth and falsity in litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609
1. The rules on candor to tribunals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .609
2. Which rule applies when? A taxonomy of truth-telling
problems in litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .611
3. A lawyer’s duties if a client or witness intends to give
false testimony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .613
a. When the lawyer believes that a criminal defendant
intends to lie on the stand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613
Nix v. Whiteside . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613
b. A lawyer’s “knowledge” of a client’s intent to give false
testimony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618
Problem 11-2: Flight from Sudan, Scene 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620
c. A lawyer’s duties if a client intends to mislead the court
without lying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624
Problem 11-3: Flight from Sudan, Scene 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 626
d. A lawyer’s duty if he has reason to know that a client
has lied to a tribunal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628
e. Variations in state rules on candor to tribunals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628
4. False impressions created by lawyers during litigation. . . . . . . . . . . . .631
How Simpson Lawyers Bamboozled a Jury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631
Problem 11-4: The Drug Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633
Problem 11-5: The Body Double . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 634
5. Lawyers’ duties of truthfulness in preparing witnesses to
testify . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .635
Problem 11-6: Refreshing Recollection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 638
D. Concealment of physical evidence and documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640
1. Duties of criminal defense lawyers with respect to evidence
of crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .640
Problem 11-7: Child Pornography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649
2. Concealment of documents and other evidence in civil
and criminal cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .650
a. A limited obligation to reveal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650
b. A lawyer’s duties in responding to discovery requests . . . . . . . . . . 652
Wayne D. Brazil, Views from the Front Lines:
Observations by Chicago Lawyers About the
System of Civil Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653
xxiv Contents

Ethics: Beyond the Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 655

Problem 11-8: The Damaging Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 658
E. The duty to disclose adverse legal authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661
F. Disclosures in ex parte proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 663
G. Improper influences on judges and juries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665
1. Improper influences on judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .665
a. Ex parte communication with judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665
b. Campaign contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667
2. Improper influences on juries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .668
a. Lawyers’ comments to the press . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 668
Narrowing restrictions on trial publicity: the Gentile case . . . . 668
Problem 11-9: A Letter to the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 672
Scott Brede, A Notable Case of Exceptionally
Unsafe Sex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674
b. Impeachment of truthful witnesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 675
Harry I. Subin, The Criminal Defense Lawyer’s
“Different Mission” : Reflections on the “Right”
to Present a False Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 676
c. Statements by lawyers during jury trials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677
H. Lawyers’ duties in nonadjudicative proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683

Chapter 12: Lawyers’ Duties to Adversaries and

Third Persons 687
A. Communications with lawyers and third persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 688
1. Deception of third persons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .688
a. The duty to avoid material false statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 688
Problem 12-1: Emergency Food Stamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 689
b. Lawyers’ duties of truthfulness in fact investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . 692
The Gatti Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693
Note About Gatti. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
c. Lawyers’ duties of truthfulness in negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
d. Receipt of inadvertently transmitted information,
including metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700
e. Obligation of disclosure to third persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 702
2. Restrictions on contact with represented persons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .702
The Messing case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 708
3. Restrictions on contact with unrepresented persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . .710
Problem 12-2: The Complaining Witness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715
4. Respect for the rights of third persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .717
Problem 12-3: The Break-In . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 718
Note: Stolen documents as evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719
 Contents xxv

B. Duties of prosecutors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719

Ken Armstrong & Maurice Possley, Trial and Error, Part 1:
Verdict: Dishonor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .720
1. Undercover investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .722
Problem 12-4: The Prosecutor’s Masquerade . . . . . . . . . . . . 725
Problem 12-5: The Corrupt Governor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 726
2. Required investigation by prosecutors before charges are
filed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .728
3. Concealment of exculpatory evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .730
The Duke lacrosse case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 730
4. Unreliable evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .732
5. Pretrial publicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .735
6. Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .736
Ellen Yaroshefsky, Wrongful Convictions: It Is
Time to Take Prosecution Discipline Seriously . . . . . . . . . . . . .736
C. Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 738
Problem 12-6: A Letter of Commendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740
D. Are lawyers really too zealous? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 741
Ted Schneyer, Moral Philosophy’s Standard Misconception
of Legal Ethics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .742

Chapter 13: The Provision of Legal Services 745

A. The unmet need for legal services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746
B. Sources of free legal services for those who cannot afford legal fees . . . . 753
1. Right to counsel for indigent litigants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .753
a. Criminal defendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 753
Richard C. Dieter, With Justice for Few: The Growing
Crisis in Death Penalty Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 758
b. Parties in civil and administrative proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 761
2. Civil legal aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .765
a. Legal Services Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
Alan W. Houseman & Linda E. Perle, Securing
Equal Justice for All: A Brief History of Civil
Legal Assistance in the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 766
Problem 13-1: Restrictions on Legal Services . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
b. Other civil legal services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
c. The IOLTA controversy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
3. Fee-shifting statutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .776
a. Fee waiver as a term of a settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777
b. Who is a “prevailing party” entitled to attorneys’ fees? . . . . . . . . . 780
Margaret Graham Tebo, Fee-Shifting Fallout. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 781
xxvi Contents

4. Pro bono representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .781

Judith L. Maute, Changing Conceptions of Lawyers’
Pro Bono Responsibilities: From Chance Noblesse
Oblige to Stated Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .789
Problem 13-2: Mandatory Pro Bono Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 792
5. Loan forgiveness and scholarships for public service lawyers. . . . . . .793
C. Restrictions on participation by nonlawyers in providing legal
services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 795
1. Unauthorized practice of law statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .795
David C. Vladeck, Statement Before the ABA
Commission on Non-lawyer Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .797
Problem 13-3: Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803
2. The prohibition of multidisciplinary practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .805
3. The prohibition of nonlawyer investment in law firms . . . . . . . . . . . .809
Problem 13-4: Service to the Poor and Middle Class . . . . . 813

Chapter 14: The American Legal Profession: Past,

Present, and Future 815
A. History and development of the U.S. legal profession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817
1. Pre-revolutionary America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .817
2. The nineteenth and twentieth centuries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .818
3. A short history of American legal education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .819
B. Advertising and solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822
1. Advertising of legal services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .822
Bates v. State Bar of Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822
2. Solicitation of clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .829
Problem 14-1: Do You Need a Lawyer? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832
C. Diversity and discrimination in U.S. law firms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834
1. Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .836
Problem 14-2: The Job Interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
2. People of color . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .842
3. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .847
4. Lawyers with disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .849
5. Other bases of discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .850
D. Legal culture in certain practice settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851
1. Large firms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .856
Michael Asimow, Embodiment of Evil: Law Firms in
the Movies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .857
Patrick J. Schiltz, On Being a Happy, Healthy, and
Ethical Member of an Unhappy, Unhealthy, and
Unethical Profession. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .860
 Contents xxvii

2. Small firms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .863

a. Salaries and attrition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863
b. Setting one’s own schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863
c. Bringing in business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866
d. Promotion in small firms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866
e. Other features of small-firm life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866
f. Urban versus rural practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867
g. Gender patterns in small firms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868
h. The future of small firms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868
i. Small firms and the Internet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869
3. Government and nonprofit organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .869
E. Work settings for lawyers: Culture and satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871
F. The business of law practice in the twenty-first century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875
1. The 2008 recession: Impact on the legal profession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .876
2. Structural changes in private law practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .879
3. Temporary and contract lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .880
4. Lawyers in retail stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .882
5. The Internet as a substitute for legal services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .883
6. Outsourcing legal work to cut labor costs: Offshoring
and onshoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .884
7. Multistate practice: A challenge to state-based licensing . . . . . . . . . . .888
Stephen Gillers, It’s an MJP World: Model Rules
Revisions Open the Door for Lawyers to Work
Outside Their Home Jurisdictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .890
8. Globalization of law practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .895
9. New methods of financing law firms and legal work . . . . . . . . . . . . . .895

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901

Table of Articles, Books, and Reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
Table of Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
Table of Rules, Restatements, Statutes, Bar Opinions,
and Other Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00