Professional Responsibility and Ethics Committee
Topic: Lawyers’ participation in listserv communications and chat rooms –
“Do lawyers participating in e-mail communications with a listserv or ‘chat room’ risk engaging in improper ex parte communications if judges in front of whom the lawyers may appear also have access to that same information?”
Summary of the opinion (by the Committee):
“Listserv communications present the possibility for ex parte communications between lawyers and judicial officers who are involved in a case. Inadvertent contact, in that context, likely violates no ethical proscription; and, too, lawyers may rely upon the independent duties of judges to avoid such ex parte contacts. Regardless, however, problems could still arise depending upon the communication’s nature, or an unintended recipient’s response. Since attorneys must always remain mindful of their duties to protect confidential client information, and one never knows who might read or react to e-mail posted to a listserv, attorneys should avoid including information in listserv postings identifiable to particular cases or controversies.”
From the opinion:
Listserv is “a public or semi-public, non-confidential forum for the exchange of e-mail.” “A chat room is a place on the Internet where people with similar interests can meet and communicate…”
CASES
Bell v. Staacke (1911) 159 Cal. 193; Durbin v. State Bar (1979) 23 Cal.3d 461; Edwards v. State Bar (1990) 52 Cal.3d 28; Fellows v. Superior Court (1980) 108 Cal.App.3d 55; Hamilton v. State Bar (1979) 23 Cal.3d 868, 87; In re Jonathan S. (1979) 88 Cal.App.3d 468; In re Jordan (1972) 7 Cal.3d 930; Izazaga v. Superior Court (People) (1991) 54 Cal.3d 356; King v. State Bar (1990) 52 Cal.3d 307; McKesson HBOC, Inc. v. Superior Court (State of Oregon) (2004) 115, Cal.App.4th 1229; McKnight v. State Bar (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1025; U.S. v. Councilman (1st Cir. Aug. 11, 2005) 2005 WL 1907528; Wilbanks v. Wolk (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 883; Zaheri v. New Motor Vehicle Board (1997) 55 Cal.App. 4th 1305
STATUTES
Bus & Prof Code §§ 5499.30, 6068, 6158, 6158.3
Code of Civ. Proc. §§1281.85, 1899, 2018
Evidence Code § 952
18 USCA § 2517
CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT
Rule 379, 955
Appendix, Div VI, Ethics Standards for Neutral Judges in Contractual Arbitration
CALIFORNIA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Rule 1-710; Rule 5-300
CALIFORNIA CODE OF JUDICIAL ETHICS
Canon 2A; 4; 4B; 6D
ABA/LOCAL BAR ETHICS OPINIONS
Formal Opinion No. 99-413 of the American Bar Association
Formal Opinion No. 97-002 of the Orange County Bar Association
ABA ANNOTATED MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Rule 3.5
The full text is available at http://www.lacba.org…