This month's question asks how lawyers can ethically and professionally respond to negative client reviews while honoring their duty of confidentiality under Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6. Except for limited exceptions, Rule 1.6 prohibits lawyers from revealing information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent or one of the exceptions provided in the rule applies. A negative review does not trigger the “self-defense” exception provided for in subparagraph (b)(5) of the Rule. A good approach would be to courteously explain to the client that confidentiality prevents addressing specific facts online or in a public setting, while noting that the lawyer does not agree with the review and offering to meet with the client to discuss the client’s concerns privately. Read more.

This month’s questions highlight the delicate balance lawyers must maintain between respecting a client’s autonomy and safeguarding them from potential harm, especially when representing clients who may be vulnerable due to cognitive decline, other physical or mental limitations, or social isolation. These questions also raise what steps lawyers can take to assess a client’s decision-making capacity to determine that a client’s directions are truly voluntary, and free from undue influence, coercion, or manipulation. Read more.

The ARDC is pleased to announce a new website feature: “Ethics Inquiry Question of the Month.”  This feature will highlight an interesting question posed to the ARDC that month through the ARDC’s Ethics Inquiry Program, which is now in its 30^th year of assisting lawyers and members of the public with general questions about lawyers’ professional responsibilities.  ARDC Rules 601 through 606 contain information about the Ethics Inquiry Program. 

The Ethics Inquiry Program cannot and does not provide legal advice to callers.  ARDC attorneys help callers with research assistance so callers can reach their own informed conclusions and guide their conduct. Read more.