The Ethical Obligations of Attorneys in Representing Clients

Lawyers work on resolving complex legal situations and are trusted with sensitive personal information. In addition, they have to fiercely, within the bounds of morality, defend their clients.

Managing clients with competing interests is one of the trickiest ethical situations. This necessitates a thorough comprehension of the ethical duties owed by the legal profession and a strong resolve to uphold those duties under trying conditions.

Obligation to maintain confidentiality.

A fundamental tenet that underpins the relationship of trust between an attorney and their clients is attorney-client confidentiality. This ethical rule forbids lawyers from using information supplied to them by their clients without the will of the client or from disclosing it in an affirmative manner.

Attorneys must therefore take care to fulfil this obligation without violating it. This regulation does have some exceptions, though, such as when it's required to stop a client from committing a crime or hurting other people, or when a lawyer is required by a court order to divulge information.

Attorneys still owe a duty of confidentiality even after their client's representation ends. For instance, a lawyer must confront a former client and make an effort to persuade them to willingly change their behaviour if they are found to have engaged in perjury or provided false testimony in court. Moreover, Rule 1.6 forbids solicitors from giving third parties access to private information they have obtained while defending a former client.

The Honesty Duty

In order to fulfil their responsibility of candour, lawyers must speak the truth in a way that serves their clients' best interests. This entails providing information that satisfies reasonable client expectations, like an explanation of hourly billing. It also includes providing accurate, detailed descriptions of legal representation. For example, while a client may not expect an attorney to describe every trial strategy in great detail, he or she can reasonably expect that a lawyer will provide an explanation of credit card processing fees, which are a necessary component of legal services.

However, there are situations in which a lawyer's obligation to be truthful may clash with other moral obligations. For instance, if a lawyer discovers that his or her client engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct, the attorney should decline further discussion and suggest that the client seek another lawyer for advice (RPC 1.2). This is one of many reasons why it is important for lawyers to run conflict checks on prospective clients before engaging in substantive conversations with them.

Duty of Respect

Attorneys must be sensitive to the rights of clients and act scrupulously to protect them within the bounds of the law. They also have a duty to respect the legal system and not exploit it for their own gain or self-interest.

One of the most crucial aspects of this duty is keeping clients reasonably informed of the status of their cases and responding to client questions promptly. Failure to do so is a major cause of legal malpractice lawsuits.

Attorneys are also obligated to keep confidential any oral or written communications that clients reasonably expect to remain private. This is known as attorney-client privilege. The exception to this rule is if the client discloses information publicly or reveals it to others without the lawyer’s consent, such as through an unscrupulous hacker or by his or her own mistake.

In addition to confidentiality, attorneys must respect multiple clients’ interests and refrain from conflicting representation where possible. For example, a family lawyer should not represent two clients in the same matter unless both clients are aware of this potential conflict and agree to it.

Duty of Fairness

Most of the time, a lawyer’s responsibilities as a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen are harmonious. But difficult ethical problems frequently arise from conflicting responsibilities within the context of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

For example, the duty to pursue a client’s lawful objectives zealously does not militate against a concurrent obligation to treat all persons involved in the legal process with consideration and avoid the infliction of needless harm. Similarly, the duty to maintain diligence does not preclude a lawyer from acceding to reasonable requests of opposing counsel that do not prejudice the client’s rights or from being punctual in fulfilling all professional commitments.

Similarly, there will likely be at least one client during any lawyer’s career whom they really couldn’t get along with or who made it impossible for them to do their job well. In that circumstance, there is an ethical duty to advise such a client to engage different counsel.