Certain limits may be placed, while making sure duties are fulfilled
The New York State Bar Association has said that lawyers can place limitation on contact with difficult clients.
In an ethics opinion, the state bar tackled a case of a lawyer who inquired whether they can place time and manner limits on communications with a client described as “physically intimidating, verbally abusive, and often non-responsive.”
The inquiring lawyer wanted to limit communications with the client to scheduled appointments and written communications. If the client did not abide by the limits, the inquirer wanted to consider withdrawing from representing the client.
“A lawyer may place time and manner limitations on communications with a client provided the lawyer promptly informs and consults with the client on matters within the lawyer’s duty of communication. If a breakdown occurs in communications between a lawyer and client such that representation cannot be carried out effectively, the lawyer may seek to withdraw from representing the client subject to any applicable rule of court,” the state bar said.
The state bar cautioned that under professional conduct rules, lawyers must keep clients apprised of material circumstances and developments in matters, comply with clients’ reasonable requests for information, and reasonably consult with clients both about the means of accomplishing the client objectives and about other decisions regarding the representation, some of which are within the clients’ province to decide.
On the first two, lawyers must promptly communicate. However, despite the communication obligations of lawyers being “robust” under the code, it does not prescribe a specific manner of communication except for written communication in certain circumstances, the bar said.
“Rule 1.4’s obligation that a lawyer keep the client ‘reasonably informed about the status of the matter’ can be fairly read to require a lawyer to use methods of communication that are effective, timely, and not unduly burdensome to the client, but the Rule does not prevent a lawyer from selecting the manner of communication,” the ethics opinion said.
The same rule, which governs “Communication” in the code, also says that lawyers must comply only with reasonable requests for information, thereby allowing them flexibility to limit communications that “stray beyond relevant substance of the representation.”
The rule also “does not prohibit a lawyer from controlling the timing of client communications. Other than the general requirement that developments in the case and responses to reasonable requests for information be ‘promptly’ communicated, the Rule does not curtail a lawyer’s discretion to schedule the specific timing of lawyer-client communications,” the bar said.
Related stories:
California Bar set for major reforms
Booby-trapped: Utah Bar scratches head after scandalous state-wide email blast
