|
| October 25–November 1, 2010 | Volume 8 Issue 44 |
|
Vote Tuesday! 2010 General Election In the Capitol Committee Meetings of Interest for the Week of 11/1 Complete Committee Meeting List In the Hall of Justice Attorney Grievance Commission Appointments Announced by Michigan Supreme Court Rule Amendments The amendments of MRPC 3.1 make no changes in the current rule, but modify the accompanying commentary to clarify that a lawyer is not responsible for a client's subjective motivation. The changes in MRPC 3.3 specify in paragraph (a)(1) that a lawyer shall not knowingly "fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law," and substitute paragraph (b) for current paragraph (a)(2), which deals with a disclosure that is "necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client." In addition, several paragraphs from the comment relating to remedial actions a lawyer must take upon learning that false testimony has been offered have been combined and inserted into the body of the rule as new subsection (e). The amendments of MRPC 3.4 clarify in paragraph (f)(1) that a lawyer may not ask someone other than a client to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to another party unless the person is "an employee or other agent of a client for the purposes of MRE 801(d)(2)(D)." The amendments of MRPC 3.5 add paragraph (c), which clarifies the rule regarding lawyers' contact of jurors and prospective jurors after the jury is discharged. The amendments in this rule expand the current rule considerably by moving substantial portions of the current commentary into the rule itself. See, for example, paragraph (b), and the latter portion of paragraph (a). The initial part of paragraph (a) is substantially the same as the current rule, except that the "reasonable lawyer" standard is substituted for the "reasonable person" standard. The amended rule sets specific guidelines for out-of-state lawyers who are appearing temporarily in Michigan, and is intended to work in conjunction with MRPC 8.5. See, also, MCR 8.126 and MCR 9.108(E)(8). This is a new rule. The underlying presumption of the rule is that the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct apply whenever a lawyer performs lawrelated services or controls an entity that performs law-related services. The accompanying commentary explains that the presumption may be rebutted only if the lawyer carefully informs the consumer and identifies the services that are law related and clarifies that no client-lawyer relationship exists with respect to ancillary services. MRPC 6.6 is a new rule. The rule addresses concerns that a strict application of conflict-of-interest rules may deter lawyers from volunteering to provide short-term legal services through nonprofit organizations, court-related programs, and similar other endeavors such as legal-advice hotlines. The amendments of MRPC 8.5 add a separate section on choice of law. The rule specifically gives discipline authorities jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the ethics violations of attorneys temporarily admitted to practice in Michigan. The rule is intended to work in conjunction with MRPC 5.5. See, also, MCR 8.126 and MCR 9.108(E)(8). |
Proposed Amendments 2007-17 Proposed Amendment of Rule 8.121 of the Michigan Court Rules Other Actions 2010-01 Supreme Court Appointments to the Attorney Grievance Commission At the Bar The Negligence Law Section submitted a Public Policy position on 2002-24 Proposed Amendment of Rule 7.3 of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct. The proposed addition of subrule (c) of MRPC 7.3 would require a lawyer who seeks professional employment from a prospective client to designate the writing as an advertisement by prominently displaying the words "Advertising Materials" on the outside envelope (or brochure, pamphlet, or postcard) and at the beginning and end of every written, recorded, or electronic communication. State News |
|
Links of Interest |