|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||||
2002 FINAL STATELEGISLATIVE PROGRAM CORE ISSUE ISSUE: LAWYER/CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITYSUMMARY: One of the key elements in a lawyer's effective representation of a client's interests is the principle that the confidentiality of information must be protected. Only in those circumstances when a lawyer must disclose confidential information: to prevent fraudulent or criminal acts by the client; to rectify the consequences of criminal and fraudulent acts by a client with the lawyers assistance; to protect a lawyer's rights in a controversy or disciplinary proceeding; or, to comply with other rules, court orders or statutes, may a lawyer reveal this information without the client's consent. (Rule 1.6. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION) The Maryland General Assembly has considered legislation in previous sessions affecting the attorney/client privilege. For example, in the 1988 session, legislation passed that specified the circumstances when attorneys would be exempt from reporting past incidents of child abuse. Recently, there have been discussions that modifications in the attorney/client privilege were needed to strengthen the forfeiture provisions in controlled dangerous substance statutes. In future sessions there may be additional attempts to make inroads into these confidentiality provisions in the context of enhancing the enforcement of specific crimes, or to deal with concerns about expanded use of electronic communication by attorneys. For the first time in recent years, there was a bill in 1998 to weaken the lawyer/client privilege by allowing attorneys to disclose information concerning the abuse or neglect of children. The attempt was quickly defeated, and no bills of this sort were filed in 1999 or 2000. Perhaps the greatest challenge to the attorney confidentiality principle is the trend toward multi-professional combinations, especially those involving lawyers and accountants. A bill that passed in the 2001 General Assembly backed by certified professional accountants allows CPAs to share ownership interests with those outside of the profession. Even though the legislation did not specifically mention attorneys, and indeed was filed to accommodate administrative and information technology professionals, its introduction alarmed some lawyers who feared this was the first step in undercutting the rule barring attorney-CPA incorporations. MSBA 2002 POSITION: Oppose all legislative attempts to modify the attorney/client privilege. If change in the confidentiality of information exchanged between lawyers and clients is necessary, it should be accomplished by amendments to the Maryland Rules. SAMPLE LEGISLATION:
|
||||||||||
