TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS 2016 P.R. Prof. Janicke.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CAN I LIE TO YOU? FALSE STATEMENTS, FAILURES TO DISCLOSE AND OTHER SINS IN COMMUNICATING WITH TRIBUNALS By: Bruce A. Campbell Campbell & LeBoeuf P.C.
Advertisements

Ethics in Mediation Sandy Garrett, Chief Disciplinary Council, TBPR Richard Murrell, Moderator.
Chapter 6-3.
How to Survive a 12-Hour Road Trip with Opposing Counsel (1 Ethics Credit) Presented by: Brian Nichols, Paul Spruhan & Christina West.
Part I.  Chapter 27- Employment contracts  Mock Trial Information  Criminal Law.
John Steele, Attorney at Law
© The McCoy Law Firm 2012 James McCoy The McCoy Law Firm Coit Rd., Ste. 560 Dallas, Texas (214)
Participants in a Criminal Trial. Principles Canada’s criminal justice system has two fundamental principles: an accused person is innocent until proven.
16.2- Criminal Cases.
Litigation and Alternatives for Settling Civil Disputes CHAPTER FIVE.
Confidentiality A Defining Duty. What are sources of confidentiality obligations? Constitutional law Disciplinary rules Fiduciary responsibility Court.
BELMONT UNIVERSITY AMERICAN INN OF COURT SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 PRESENTED BY KRISANN HODGES DEPUTY CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL - LITIGATION BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL.
Ethical Concerns Facing Title IV-D Attorneys
Mid-America Regulatory Conference Kansas City, Missouri June 8, 2010.
Pretrial Matters: Pleadings & Motions © Professor Mathis-Rutledge.
BAD FAITH PANEL I: TRENDS IN THIRD PARTY ACTIONS PLRB/LIRB/FDCC CRITICAL ISSUES FOR SENIOR INSURANCE EXECUTIVES AND IN-HOUSE COUNSEL SEMINAR October 23,
Scott F. Johnson Maureen MacFarlane.  Attorneys have a myriad of ethical obligations  This presentation covers some of those obligations and considers.
Litigation Ethics The Adversary System. Fuller & Randall “The institution of advocacy is not a concession to the frailties of human nature but an expression.
The Roles of Judge and Jury Court controls legal rulings in the trial Court controls legal rulings in the trial Jury decides factual issues Jury decides.
Comparative Law Spring 2002 Professor Susanna Fischer CLASS 29 GERMAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE III FRENCH CIVIL PROCEDURE March 26, 2002.
The rule in paragraph 1.10(a) also does not prohibit representation by others in the law firm where the person prohibited from involvement in a matter.
Legal Ethics for Social Services Attorneys Institute of Government 2006.
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS W. DAVID LEE Senior Resident Judge District 20B 2006 Superior Court Judges’ Conference Wrightsville Beach, NC June 15, 2006.
Chapter 10 The Criminal Trial
© 2003 Rule 1.9. Duties to Former Clients (a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person.
Free Press/Fair Trial: Prosecutors & the Media Lee Ann Barnhardt Director of Education & Communication ND Supreme Court.
Video Clips Added Here Liar Liar clips: Dad Liar, In The Office, B-Day Wish.
EVIDENCE Some Basics Spring Overview The cases you read involve facts and law Most often appellate courts decide legal issues based on the facts.
Tues. Sept. 4. drafting a complaint Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)
Discovery III Expert Witness Disclosure And Discovery Motions & Sanctions.
CHAP. 12 : PRIVILEGES P. JANICKE FALL Chap Privileges2 DEFINITION A PRIVILEGE IS A RIGHT IN SOME PERSON OR ENTITY TO BLOCK THE ADMISSION.
Avoiding Traps in Internal Investigations H. Lee Barfield II Bass, Berry and Sims PLC November 5, 2010.
Court Procedures Chapter 3.
Unit 4 Notes. Judges act in three major roles: 1. Adjudicator – must assume a neutral stance between the prosecution and the defense. Must apply the law.
Procedure Procedure at Trial. 1) Court Clerk reads the charge Indictment - if vague - quashed (struck down)
Unit 3 Seminar! K. Austin Zimmer Any question from Unit 2! Please make sure you have completed your Unit 1 & 2 Papers!
Trial Courts (pages 46 to 50). Trial Courts Courts that listen to testimony, consider evidence, and decide the facts.
Mon. Nov. 26. Work Product “Privilege” A witness, X, who is friendly to the D was interviewed by P’s attorney and a statement was drawn up Is there any.
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 HIPAA Privacy Training for County Employees.
Don’t Call My Bluff The Ethics of Negotiation James H. Gilliam BrownWinick 666 Grand Avenue, Suite 2000 Des Moines, IA Telephone:
Do You Have One?. “I represent the city as an organization and I do not represent you and I cannot guarantee the confidentiality of what you tell me.”
Unit 5 Midterm Review. What are some of the components of the ABA?
Tues. Nov. 19. discovery scope of discovery attorney-client privilege.
Public Communications Law Lecture 13 Slide 1 Controlling Pre-Trial Publicity A court is obligated to try to make sure the defendant gets a fair trial.
John Steele, Attorney at Law. 2 Confidentiality 3 Topics 1. Definitions 2. Comparison 3. ABA Approach 1. Rule; Exceptions; Other rules 4. California.
TOPIC A: REGULATION OF THE PROFESSION P.R Prof. Janicke.
TOPIC B: CONFIDENTIALITY 2016 P.R. Prof. Janicke.
TOPIC G: CLIENTS’ RIGHTS 2016 P.R. Prof. Janicke.
TOPIC A: REGULATION OF THE PROFESSION P.R Prof. Janicke.
1 Eleventh National HIPAA Summit The New HIPAA Enforcement Rule Gerald “Jud” E. DeLoss, Esq. General Counsel Fairmont Orthopedics & Sports Medicine, P.A.
TOPIC Q: (1) RELATIONSHIP WITH A PROSPECTIVE CLIENT (2) TERMINATING EXISTING CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS 2016 P.R. Prof. Janicke.
Privilege, Privacy, Waiver & Ethical Considerations.
1 ETHICAL LAWYERING Spring, 2006 Class Cal. Civ. Proc. Code (a) Every trial court may order a party, the party's attorney, or both to pay.
1 Ethical Lawyering Spring 2006 Class 8. 2 Rest. 68 Except as otherwise provided in this Restatement, the attorney-client privilege may be invoked as.
It is All About the Kids: The Nobility of Amateurism.
Beginning and Ending the Lawyer-Client Relationship.
Fairness in Litigation. MR 3.5 – p. 88 A lawyer shall not: (a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror or other official by means prohibited.
1 Ethical Lawyering Fall, 2006 Class 4. 2 MODELS OF THE RELATIONSHIP Traditional Model Participatory Model Hired Gun Model.
Outline of the U.S. and Arizona Criminal Justice Systems
Chapter 1 Structure of the Trial & Presentation of Evidence
Pretrial Conference After discovery, a pretrial hearing is held to clarify the issues, consider a settlement, and set rules for trial Once the trial court.
Thurs., Oct. 12.
Candor and Truthfulness in the Age of Fake News and Alternative Facts
Trial Courts.
Jessica Intermill Founding Member, Hogen Adams PLLC
Tues. Nov. 12.
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
Tues., Sept. 3.
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
Chapter 5: The Court System
Presentation transcript:

TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS 2016 P.R. Prof. Janicke

A NON-FRIVOLOUS BASIS FOR EVERYTHING LAWYER MUST HAVE A BASIS “IN LAW AND FACT” FOR EVERY ASSERTION AND FOR EVERY CONTROVERTING R. 3.1 CAN BE A GOOD-FAITH ARGUMENT FOR MODIFICATION OR REVERSAL OF EXISTING LAW –BUT YOU MUST SAY SO 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS2

THE PROVISION FOR MODIFICATION OR REVERSAL WILL NOT WORK FOR A STATUTE, UNLESS IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL IT WILL NOT WORK FOR A RULE, UNLESS THE TRIBUNAL HAS POWER TO CHANGE IT 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS3

CRIMINAL PLEA OF “NOT GUILTY” IS OK REGARDLESS OF THE KNOWN FACTS AND EVIDENCE –“REQUIRE THAT EVERY ELEMENT BE ESTABLISHED” R. 3.1, LAST SENTENCE BUT AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE WOULD BE BOUND BY THE RULE 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS4

[TEXAS CIVIL] THE PRACTICE OF PLEADING A GENERAL DENIAL IS OKed IN TEXAS RULES Tex. R C3 AN EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL U.S. RULE DISCUSSED HERE 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS5

MORE OF THE SAME R. 3.3 NO FALSE STATEMENT OF FACT OR LAW ALLOWED MUST CORRECT ANY FALSE STATEMENT PREVIOUSLY MADE BY THE LAWYER MUST DISCLOSE KNOWN “DIRECTLY ADVERSE” AUTHORITY 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS6

R. 3.3, CONT’D. MUST NOT OFFER EVIDENCE “KNOWN TO BE FALSE” R. 3.3(a) IF IT HAS BEEN OFFERED BY LAWYER, CLIENT, OR WITNESS “CALLED BY” THE LAWYER, LAWYER MUST TAKE REMEDIAL ACTION 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS7

“FALSE” SIMPLY MEANS UNTRUE, WHETHER INTENTIONALLY OR MISTAKENLY 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS8

BELIEVED TO BE FALSE? THE RULE ALLOWS A LAWYER, IN MOST CIRCUMSTANCES, TO REFUSE TO PRESENT EVIDENCE IF THE LAWYER “REASONABLY BELIEVES” IT TO BE FALSE R. 3.3(a)(3) EXCEPTION: TESTIMONY OF CRIMINAL DEFENDANT (CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED” 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS9

REALITY NO LAWYER WANTS TO KNOW FOR SURE NO LAWYER WANTS TO HAVE BELIEFS ABOUT TRUE/FALSE 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS10

CLIENT’S PLAN R. 3.3(b) IF LAWYER KNOWS CASE PLAN IS CRIMINAL OR FRAUDULENT, REMEDIAL MEASURES ARE NEEDED –INCLUDING DISCLOSURE TO TRIBUNAL, IF NECESSARY EXAMPLES: THREATENING OR BRIBING JURORS OR WITNESSES; TESTIFYING FALSELY 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS11

RULE TRUMPS CONFIDENTIALITY REMEDIAL RULE CONTINUES UNTIL END OF THE PROCEEDING R. 3.3(c) OVERRIDES CONFIDENTIAL INFO RULE 1.6 R. 3.3(c) 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS12

WHAT REMEDIAL MEASURES? FIRST, TAKE UP WITH CLIENT C10 –MAKE A PLAN TO RECTIFY IF THAT FAILS, CONSIDER: –WITHDRAWING [POSSIBLE SIGNAL] C15 –INFORMING THE COURT FLAT OUT 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS13

SPECIAL RULE FOR EX PARTE PROCEEDINGS E.G., TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, ADOPTION LAWYER MUST DISCLOSE ALL KNOWN MATERIAL FACTS THAT ARE ADVERSE R. 3.3(d) ANYTHING NECESSARY TO AN “INFORMED DECISION” R. 3.3(d) C TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS14

DUTY TO EXPEDITE LITIGATION R. 3.2 DOES NOT MEAN RUSHING IN RULE PRECLUDES: –ROUTINELY SEEKING CONTINUANCES FOR CONVENIENCE OF COUNSEL C1 –LONGSTANDING LOCAL CUSTOM IS NOT AN EXCUSE C2 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS15

MOTIVATIONS FOR VIOLATING THIS RULE CLIENT ADVANTAGE – E.G., DATE FOR FINANCIAL REPORTING; MERGERS; ELECTION DAY; BANK CREDIT HELPFUL PRESS COVERAGE – E.G., STOCK PRICE AIDED BY LONGSTANDING VIGOROUS DENIALS 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS16

DUTY OF FAIRNESS TO OPPOSING PARTY AND COUNSEL R. 3.4 A LONG RULE PARA. (a): NO “UNLAWFULLY” OBSTRUCTING ACCESS TO EVIDENCE –INCLUDES SPOLIATION –A BIG TOPIC TODAY 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS17

PARA. (b): NO FALSIFYING EVIDENCE (EVEN IF NOT OFFERED) NO PROHIBITED INDUCEMENTS TO WITNESSES –CAN PAY EXPENSES, BUT NO FEE FOR FACT WITNESSES C3 –NO CONTINGENT FEE FOR EXPERT WITNESSES C3 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS18

“OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE” IS THE EASIEST OF ALL CRIMINAL TRAPS FOR A LAWYER OR CLIENT TO FALL INTO! ONE PHONE CALL WILL DO IT ONE WRONG ANSWER IN “JUST A ROUTINE INQUIRY” WILL DO IT 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS19

NO BREAKING OF RULES or ORDERS R. 3.4(c) UNLESS OPENLY –CHALLENGE TO A RULE OR ORDER 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS20

DISCOVERY REQUESTS R. 3.4(d) NO FRIVOLOUS REQUESTS NO DODGING THE OTHER SIDE’S REQUESTS –NEED REASONABLY DILIGENT EFFORT TO COMPLY 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS21

COMMENTS AT TRIAL R. 3.4(e) NO ALLUDING TO IRRELEVANT THINGS NO ALLUDING TO THINGS THAT WILL NOT BE SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE NO ASSERTING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE (“I KNOW” “WE ALL KNOW”) OR OPINION 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS22

NO BLOCKING WITNESSES R. 3.4 (f) NO REQUESTING A NON-CLIENT TO REFRAIN FROM VOLUNTARY TESTIMONY –EXCEPTION: EMPLOYEES OF CLIENT, IF NO HARM TO THEM 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS23

NO BRIBING JUDGES OR JURORS R. 3.5 OR EVEN PROSPECTIVE JURORS NO COMMUNICATING EX PARTE WITH ANY OF THE ABOVE, UNLESS ALLOWED BY LAW OR BY COURT ORDER –APPARENTLY FORBIDDEN ON ANY SUBJECT 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS24

THIS MEANS: NO DISCUSSIONS WITH JURORS PRE-VERDICT LAWYERS (EVEN THOSE NOT ON THE CASE) CANNOT DISCUSS ANYTHING WITH A SITTING JUROR – NOT EVEN THE WEATHER R. 3.5(b) NO EXCEPTIONS 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS25

RESTRICTIONS ON POST- VERDICT TALKS WITH JURORS COMMONLY DONE OK, UNLESS: –PROHIBITED BY COURT RULE OR ODER; or –JUROR DOES NOT WANT TO TALK; or –COERCION, HARASSMENT R. 3.5(b) 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS26

TRIAL PUBLICITY R. 3.6 NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON PENDING CASE IF: 1.IT WILL BE DISSEMINATED PUBLICLY AND 2.CREATE SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD OF “MATERIALLY PREJUDICING” AN ADJUDICATIVE PROCEEDING 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS27

SAFE HARBOR #1 R. 3.6(b) PUBLIC COMMENT OK IF LIMITED TO: –CLAIM OR DEFENSE INVOLVED –INFO IN THE PUBLIC RECORD –SAYING INVESTIGATION IS IN PROGRESS –SCHEDULING OF COURT STEPS –REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE IN GATHERING EVIDENCE –WARNING OF DANGER, IF PRESENT 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS28

SAFE HARBOR #2 R. 3.6(b)(7) IN ADDITION TO #1, IN A CRIMINAL CASE, OK TO REVEAL: –D’s IDENTITY, RESIDENCE, OCCUPATION, FAMILY STATUS –NEEDED INFO FOR APPREHENSION –TIME AND PLACE OF ARREST, IF ANY –ID OF INVESTIGATING OFFICERS AND AGENCIES 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS29

LAWYER AS WITNESS R. 3.7 IS OK, BUT CANNOT ADVOCATE THE CASE –EXCEPTIONS: UNCONTESTED ISSUE SUBSTANTIAL HARDSHIP TO CLIENT ON VALUE OF LEGAL SERVICES RENDERED 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS30

WHEN BLOCKED BY THE LAWYER- WITNESS RULE: –A COLLEAGUE CAN TAKE OVER R. 3.7(b) –BLOCKED LAWYER CAN ASSIST 2016TOPIC M: DUTIES TO COURTS31