Maybe I’m naive, but I thought it – what we do, this side and the other – was about justice. Righting wrongs. Then why, for some, is it about winning and losing?

36 thoughts on “Justice

  1. Miranda

    See Rule 1.4 of Rules of Professional Conduct; In the commentary (Connecticut Practice Book), the following paragraph appears:

    Withholding Information. In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication. Thus, a lawyer might withhold a psychiatric diagnosis of a client when the examining psychiatrist indicates that disclosure would harm the client. A lawyer may not withhold information to serve the lawyer’s own interest or convenience of the interests or convenience of another person. Rules or court orders governing litigation may provide that information supplied to a lawyer may not be disclosed to the client. Rule 3.4 (3) directs compliance with such rules or orders.

    See also Connecticut Statewide Grievance Committee Decision, 04-0583, finding that the attorney “engaged in unethical conduct [for] fail[ing] to provide the Complainant with a copy of his complete file in violation of Rule 1.16(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.”

    From CT Eth. Op. 95-1 (Conn. Bar. Assn. 1/6/95), quoting from D.C. Bar Committee on Legal Ethics, Opinion 168, 4/15/86:

    While it may be impossible to predict with certainty that any particular refusal to deliver any specific document will in fact result in prejudice to the client, a lawyer’s obligation to his client requires that he err, if at all, on the side of serving the client’s interests. This obligation requires an attorney to deliver upon request, the entire contents of the client’s files…

  2. SPO

    And I am sure that these cases have to do with turning over witness addresses in a criminal case.

    The blood is on your hands guys.

  3. Pingback: Justice? : Defending People

Leave a Reply