Comments on: Ethical Duty to Report Your Own Malpractice – A Proposed Opinion http://practiceblawg.com/2009/07/ethical-duty-to-report-your-own-malpractice-a-proposed-opinion/ Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:07:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: ejoranson http://practiceblawg.com/2009/07/ethical-duty-to-report-your-own-malpractice-a-proposed-opinion/comment-page-1/#comment-108 ejoranson Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:15:39 +0000 http://www.practicelaw.org/blog/?p=291#comment-108 Mr. Gillers, the proposed rule does not "obligate" an attorney to self-report. Are you proposing self-reporting to be an "obligation" (must/shall) or just to be advisable (should)? <br><br>Regardless, I find this rule's limited application to current clients, not former clients, odd. Mr. Gillers, the proposed rule does not “obligate” an attorney to self-report. Are you proposing self-reporting to be an “obligation” (must/shall) or just to be advisable (should)?

Regardless, I find this rule's limited application to current clients, not former clients, odd.

]]> By: Stephen Gillers http://practiceblawg.com/2009/07/ethical-duty-to-report-your-own-malpractice-a-proposed-opinion/comment-page-1/#comment-89 Stephen Gillers Tue, 14 Jul 2009 19:43:21 +0000 http://www.practicelaw.org/blog/?p=291#comment-89 I wholeheartedly spport this opinion. A contrary view is in my view indefensible and, indeed, embarrassing to the profession. Possible malpractice is something about which the client has a strong interest in knowing, whether or not the possible malpractice crates a conflict of interest in continued representation. The client may choose to change lawyers and nothing more. That's its right, of course. The client may want to explore an action for damages. The client may have a claim for fee disgorgement. Unless the lawyer is obligated to reveal the possibility of malpractice, the client will often be wholly unaware of it or of the possible damage it may have caused. This ignorance is particulary a risk for clients who are less sophisticated in the use of lawyers. I don't see how the profession could say that a lawyer who conceals his or her possible malpractice is an "ethical" lawyer. I wholeheartedly spport this opinion. A contrary view is in my view indefensible and, indeed, embarrassing to the profession. Possible malpractice is something about which the client has a strong interest in knowing, whether or not the possible malpractice crates a conflict of interest in continued representation. The client may choose to change lawyers and nothing more. That's its right, of course. The client may want to explore an action for damages. The client may have a claim for fee disgorgement. Unless the lawyer is obligated to reveal the possibility of malpractice, the client will often be wholly unaware of it or of the possible damage it may have caused. This ignorance is particulary a risk for clients who are less sophisticated in the use of lawyers. I don't see how the profession could say that a lawyer who conceals his or her possible malpractice is an “ethical” lawyer.

]]>