Reckless Abandon: The Shadow of Model Rule 8.4(g) and a Path Forward

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Tarkington
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-168
Author(s):  
Steven L. Lovett

            This article is a comparative overview of the American Bar Association’s Model Rule 1.6(b) before and after the issuance of the ABA’s Formal Opinion 473, issued on February 17, 2016, which was an attempt to restate and revise the rule’s ethical expectations and to help settle several questions that had plagued the rule’s practical application. A lawyer’s duty of confidentiality to his or her client, and the public policy favoring judicial efficiency and fair disclosure during the discovery phase of litigation, often places lawyers in precarious ethical positions. This article attempts to provide guidance on this issue through an analysis of the rule and the context in which a lawyer’s overarching duty to keep his or her client’s information confidential can be precluded by the lawful compulsion to disclose such information without incurring malpractice liability.  


2021 ◽  
pp. 198-217
Author(s):  
Himanshu Prabha Ray

The unique feature of the Mauryan Empire is the religious writings or dhamma-lipi inscribed by King Aśoka on rocks and sandstone pillars across the Indian subcontinent. Many of the edicts are repeated in different parts of the country and present a unified vision for the region. These records have been a primary source for understanding the administrative structure of the Mauryan Empire. It is significant that the edicts have not been replicated by subsequent rulers. Though the nature of Aśoka’s dhamma has been debated by historians, there is no denying the fact that it is in Buddhist writings that Aśoka figures prominently as a righteous ruler whose model rule was followed by later rulers to the present.


Author(s):  
Andrea Kupfer Schneider

At the end of Professor Menkel-Meadow’s landmark article, she notes “the attraction of the problem-solving approach to negotiations is that it returns the solution of the problem to the client and forces the lawyer to perform her essential role in the legal system—that of solving problems” (p. 841). While most view this article as a call to change the mindset of lawyers to engage in the problem-solving method of negotiation, I want to focus on its underlying message—a lawyer’s essential role includes counseling about more than the law. In fact, as this article was being written in the early 1980s, the Kutak Commission added Model Rule 2.1, authorizing attorneys to counsel clients about the consequences of their actions beyond the law. Professor Menkel-Meadow gives us the road map to do that. Moreover, Professor Menkel-Meadow’s explanation is even more compelling, because it is based on a shift in mindset and is the first to utilize interdisciplinary literature....


Philosophy ◽  
1964 ◽  
Vol 39 (150) ◽  
pp. 349-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Odegard

Like his earlier Language and Philosophy (1949). and Problems of Analysis (1954), Models and Metaphors is a collection of Black's papers unified by the belief that linguistic considerations can play an important part in framing and solving philosophical problems. Broadly speaking, the linguistic approach takes two forms: (1) examining the uses of a word, or of a set of related words, frequently occurring in philosophical inquiries, either for the general purposes of clarification (e.g., of ‘model’, ‘rule’) or as a useful aid to the solution, or dissolution, of a specific philosophical problem (e.g., of ‘implies’ in connection with ‘What is the relationship between an assertion and its presuppositions ?’); (2) considering questions about language, meaning, and related subjects (e.g., ‘Can one draw valid inferences from premises about grammar to ontological conclusions?’, ‘Do the accusatives of meaning-formulae designate anything?’, or ‘Are necessary statements validated by appealing to linguistic rules?’). Obviously, given that the concepts involved are of language or meaning, the former approach can be readily incorporated in the latter.


2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 408-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zakarya Zyada ◽  
◽  
Yasuhisa Hasegawa ◽  
Gancho Vachkov ◽  
Toshio Fukuda

A fuzzy-logic-based model, suitable for force control, for each hydraulic actuator of a parallel link manipulator is presented. Constructing the fuzzy model rule base mainly consists of 2 stages: (1) learning rules from examples for the known acquired input/output data of the hydraulic actuators and (2) completing unknown fuzzy rules from heuristics and experience based on the logic of actuators' behavior. We first present the algorithm of fuzzy-rule base modeling and its application for one actuator. We then present fuzzy rule base results characterizing each hydraulic actuator, differing from one to another, of a 6 DOF parallel link manipulator. Simulation output results from fuzzy models show good agreement with experimental results.


2013 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 1294-1302
Author(s):  
F. Quinaz ◽  
P. Fazendeiro ◽  
P. Araújo ◽  
M. Castelo-branco ◽  
N. Tavares ◽  
...  

Land ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 448
Author(s):  
Youness Achmani ◽  
Walter T. de Vries ◽  
José Serrano ◽  
Mathieu Bonnefond

Nowadays, urban sprawl, urban densification, housing shortages, and land scarcity are some problems that intervene in the practice of urban planning. Those specific problems are currently more than ever emergent because they imply the notion of spatial justice and socio-spatial inequalities. Hence, it seems necessary to promptly research and describe these from a new and different perspective. Thus, we consider the Institutional Analysis and Development to define a conceptual framework to assess spatial justice. We simplify it into a three-dimensional model (rule, process, and outcomes) in which a matrix of indicators applies on each level. We elaborate the indicators to measure spatial inequalities in an urban development project, for which the reason we refer to the egalitarian paradigm of spatial justice. While spatial inequalities raise questions about land management, we elaborate those indicators related to three land management interventions: the use, access to, and redistribution of land use.


1981 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 875-965 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne D. Brazil

This article follows two earlier pieces in which the author reported the findings of a pilot empirical exploration of how well the discovery system in civil litigation is functioning. Brazil begins by focusing on the principal problems his field studies exposed and by suggesting a theory of discovery reform which responds to the nature and sources of those problems. His principal thesis is that too often neither judges nor attorneys assume sufficient responsibility for the discovery system as a system. Most of this article is devoted to two major proposals that are designed to promote in the judiciary and in counsel a sense of responsibility for the pretrial system and to equip the judiciary to convert that sense into action. Brazil proposes a comprehensive model rule that courts could use to manage the pretrial development of civil actions. He then uses his model as a background for suggesting modifications to and extensions of the proposed revision of Rule 16 that the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules has circulated for comment. He also offers a critique of current provisions for sanctions and advances an alternative sanctions rule that acknowledges a right to compensation for damages caused by an opponent's breach of pretrial obligations and that reduces the scope of judicial discretion to refuse to impose compensatory awards.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document