Amicus Brief of 83 Legal Ethics Professors in United States v. Varner

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Green
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Ethics

Loyalty and Disclosure in Legal Ethics

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-107
Author(s):  
Benjamin C Zipursky
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Financial Fraud ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Legal Ethics ◽  
Duty Of Loyalty ◽  
Role Based ◽  
Government Institution

Abstract: As fiduciaries, lawyers owe duties of loyalty to their clients, and such duties are widely understood to entail strong duties of confidentiality. This article addresses the question of whether loyalty-based duties of confidentiality preclude the legal system from imposing on lawyers duties to disclose that their clients have been engaging in financial fraud. It distinguishes two possible bases for such duties of disclosure: alleged duties of care to investors who will suffer financial harm if these frauds are not revealed, and legislative mandates requiring lawyers to report evidence of legal violations to a government institution. The latter—driven by a “gatekeeping” rationale, and illustrated here by a (failed) proposal of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission—is different in substance and structure from the former, “duty-of-care” rationale. The article argues that, while there may be good arguments based on a lawyer’s role-based duty of loyalty to a reject a duty-of-care based rationale for disclosure duties, these arguments do not defeat the gatekeeping, legislative-mandate rationales for disclosure duties. While a stringent duty of loyalty to a client may indeed conflict with the structure of duties of care to third parties, it need not conflict with a positive mandate to report legal violations.

Legal Ethics in the American Practice of Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 196
Author(s):  
WILLIAM ELLIOTT BUTLER
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Legal Profession ◽  
Codes Of Ethics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Professional Responsibility ◽  
Professional Conduct ◽  
Legal Ethics ◽  
Bar Association

The author examines in this article the professional legal ethics in the United States, more commonly known as “professional responsibility”, as a subject to an unusual pattern of “codification”. Detailed rules historically originated with the legal profession itself, initially in legal doctrine and then a Code of Ethics published in 1887 by the Alabama State Bar Association. Whatever borrowing occurred among states when introducing their own “codes of ethics”, the Alabama model was drawn upon when, in 1908, the American Bar Association approved “32 Canons of Professional Ethics”. The sources of law regulating the professional conduct of lawyers in the United States are several. The legal ethics within state courts is regulated by the courts, the legislative (or parliamentary) organ, and the Bar of each state. Professional responsibility, in the spirit of David Hoffman, has become an integral part of legal education and licensing. Law students take a compulsory course in professional responsibility and are required to pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination administered nationally in the United States by the National Conference of Bar Examiners. The author concludes, that legal ethics has been an integral part of American legal education since the early nineteenth century. In the twentieth century the legal profession itself introduced “private” canons of ethics which were then accepted by the highest courts in virtually all states as rules of professional conduct binding upon all members of the Bar. It remains a distinctive element of the American legal system that binding rules of professional conduct are formed mostly by the courts, and not by the legislature. These rules are initially “codified” by a voluntary non-State organization, adopted by the courts, and then applied by the courts in cases which ultimately become components of the law of precedent; that is, a separate and distinct source of law.

scholarly journals The Ethics of Legal Practitioners in Resource-Scarce Institutions ‒ PM Mashishi v Z Mdlala [2018] 17 BLLR 693 (LC); (2018) 39 ILJ 1607 (LC)

Obiter ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Whitear ◽  
Helen Kruuse
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ethical Conduct ◽  
Legal Ethics ◽  
The Law

We consider what the court says in relation to hopeless cases in resource-scarce institutions, and consider how we could understand the required ethical conduct of legal practitioners in these situations better – specifically with reference to William Simon’s “ethical discretion” approach to lawyering. Simon’s critique of contemporary legal ethics in the United States appears to be particularly apt in the circumstances of the Mashishi case – specifically on the perceived amorality of the lawyer’s adversarial role, which results in an uninhibited pursuit of client ends, so long as they are arguably within the law.

Application of a Simple Cold Stub to the Direct Observation of Frozen Hydrated Sand

1973 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 212-213
Author(s):  
John M. Wehrung ◽  
Richard J. Harniman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Surface Water ◽  
Direct Observation ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Clay Particles ◽  
Organic Debris ◽  
Rock Formations ◽  
Water Tables ◽  
Permeable Rock ◽  
Natural Means

Water tables in aquifer regions of the southwest United States are dropping off at a rate which is greater than can be replaced by natural means. It is estimated that by 1985 wells will run dry in this region unless adequate artificial recharging can be accomplished. Recharging with surface water is limited by the plugging of permeable rock formations underground by clay particles and organic debris.A controlled study was initiated in which sand grains were used as the rock formation and water with known clay concentrations as the recharge media. The plugging mechanism was investigated by direct observation in the SEM of frozen hydrated sand samples from selected depths.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document