The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Cohen is getting disbarred for taping Trump, right?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:56 PM Author: Drunken mad-dog skullcap rigor Right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475030) |
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:57 PM Author: Slate shaky cuck casino No. The deep state will protect him. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475032) |
 |
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:57 PM Author: Swollen chad (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475033) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:58 PM Author: startled duck-like hospital Hehe (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475035) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:58 PM Author: curious pisswyrm dysfunction Curious, what rule does this violate? He didn't leak the tape or anything. He kept confidence. Trump is the one who waived privilege on the tape. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475036) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:59 PM Author: curious pisswyrm dysfunction Just googled and this popped up:
In a move completely unrelated to the recent terrorist attack on lower Manhattan and Washington, D.C., the American Bar Association’s Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility recently reversed long-standing precedent and held that lawyers may ethically tape their conversations, with some caveats. ABA Formal Opinion 01-422, issued with little fanfare on the eve of the ABA Annual Meeting in Chicago in early August, held that the Model Rules do not proscribe a lawyer from taping his own conversations, provided the taping is not illegal in the relevant jurisdictions and the lawyer does not lie about whether the conversation is being taped, if asked about it.
http://www.newyorklegalethics.com/aba-lawyers-may-tape-their-conversations/ |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:09 PM Author: histrionic sexy death wish jfc just do always be a client aware that you always have to ask your lawyer if he's recording the conversation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475072) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:10 PM Author: Slippery maize library why would it matter? lawyer can't divulge client confidences regardless. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475075) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:14 PM Author: curious pisswyrm dysfunction Cr plenty of lawyers take notes of conversations almost verbatim anyway (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475091) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:15 PM Author: Aqua blathering parlour I'm pretty sure that concerns taping conversations with non-clients, which has been a hot ethics issue for quite some time. For the longest time, it was a given that a lawyer acted unethically by recording conversations with third-parties without disclosure. After most states enacted statutes concerning the property of recording conversations (i.e., statutes requiring 1 or 2 party consent), many states overturned prior decisions, taking the position that the statutes established reasonable expectations of privacy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475098) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:22 PM Author: curious pisswyrm dysfunction sounds right but is there anything that would make you believe it doesn't also apply to your convos with clients, so long as you are otherwise acting within the rules (i.e. obviously still have to keep clients confidences, etc.). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475118) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:42 PM Author: Aqua blathering parlour Sure. I'm not going to spend the time looking up rules, but as a general proposition, your duty with respect to honesty and disclosure is weakest when dealing with the general public and becomes more stringent with the court and highest with your own client, with the client having a significantly elevated expectation of privacy with his attorney relative to a non-clients and the same attorney. I would anticipate in the context of a bar complaint concerning an attorney's "secret" recording of conversations with clients looking at the attorney's subjective reason for making the recording, with that likely determining how fucked the attorney would be.
|
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:58 PM Author: vigorous slap-happy lay the ethics rules go beyond privilege, including not disclosing even non-confidential information that may be detrimental to you client (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475279) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 12:58 PM Author: Slippery maize library when your client is a lying shitbag you gotta protect yourself somehow. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475038) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:04 PM Author: heady becky parlor So you're saying every lawyer should record client convos? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475056) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:05 PM Author: Slippery maize library sure just don't get raided by the feds. not sure cohen was a lawyer since he didn't practice law. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475059) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:08 PM Author: curious pisswyrm dysfunction probably not a bad idea for SOLOs repping shady clients/criminals, unless there's some ethical rule against it, but from brief googling it doesn't seem like there is one (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475068) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:13 PM Author: heady becky parlor The model rules don't mean shit. California is a 2-party consent state, for example. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475084) |
|
Date: July 22nd, 2018 1:15 PM Author: curious pisswyrm dysfunction Well, yeah, if you are in a two party state then obviously you can't do this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4032198&forum_id=2#36475093) |