Law Commons^™

Power As A Factor In Lawyers' Ethical Deliberation, Susan D. Carle

Hofstra Law Review

A fundamental disagreement among legal ethics scholars concerns the difference between client-centered and justice-centered approaches to lawyers' ethical obligations. Advocates of client-centered approaches put lawyers' duty to the client first. Justice-centered theorists critique the elevation of the client's interests over other important concerns lawyers affect through the work they do on behalf of clients. Scholars who adopt justice-centered approaches argue that lawyers' ethical obligations should be analyzed with a paramount focus on achieving justice.

Legal ethicists often view these two approaches as inconsistent with each other, but I argue in this Article that they are not necessarily so. Building on …

Counseling Organizational Clients"Within The Bounds Of The Law", Roger C. Cramton

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

Creating Space For Lawyers To Be Ethical: Driving Towards An Ethic Of Transparency, Burnele V. Powell

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lawyers' Ethics In An Adversary System - Foreword: Like Gravity, Roy D. Simon

Hofstra Law Review

The adversary system, like gravity, affects us all. We cannot escape it. The adversary system, and the ethical standards of the lawyers who operate within the adversary system, therefore warrant continual study. ...

This issue collects nearly all of the papers delivered at the conference. Of equal interest, each paper is followed by a transcript of the fascinating exchanges that occurred between the speaker and members of the audience during a lengthy question and answer session after each speech.

The Triage Trilemma, Steven Lubet

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legal Ethics And The Constitution, Alan Dershowitz

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

Monroe Freedman's Solution To The Criminal Defense Lawyer's Trilemma Is Wrong As A Matter Of Policy And Constitutional Law, Stephen Gillers

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

Secret Evidence Is Slowly Eroding The Adversary System: Cipa And Fisa In The Courts, Ellen Yaroshefsky

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

Do Bar Association Ethics Committees Serve The Public Or The Profession? An Argument For Process Change, Hon. David G. Trager

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Zeal Shortage, Anita Bernstein

Hofstra Law Review

Although the duty of zealous advocacy enjoys nominal approval in most state bar rules and the secondary literature, today the majority of writings about zeal in the practice of law present zeal in a negative light. Critics use this word to object to lawyers' dishonesty, hyperpartisanship, aggressive or confrontational work styles, rudeness, and disregard for the interests of adversaries, the courts, and the public. This article, part of a Hofstra University symposium, builds on the literature that praises zealous advocacy (much of it written by symposium honoree Monroe Freedman) to identify a shortage of zeal in American legal practice and …

Henry Lord Brougham And Zeal, Monroe H. Freedman

Hofstra Law Review

In a recent article, Professors Fred Zacharias and Bruce Green undertook to "reconceptualize" advocacy ethics. In the course of that article, they rejected the ethic of zeal, and stated erroneously that Henry Lord Brougham had himself repudiated his famous statement on zealous advocacy.

Inspired by Brougham almost two centuries ago, the "traditional aspiration" of zealous advocacy remains "the fundamental principle of the law of lawyering" and "the dominant standard of lawyerly excellence" among lawyers today. To paraphrase the ABA's 1908 Canons of Professional Ethics, the ethic of zeal requires that the lawyer give entire devotion to the interests of the …

Legal Ethics In An Adversary System: The Persistent Questions, Deborah L. Rhode

Hofstra Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Praise Of Overzealous Representation - Lying To Judges, Deceiving Third Parties, And Other Ethical Conduct, Monroe H. Freedman

Hofstra Law Review

Three ethical rules are both clear and highly desirable - MR 3.3(a)(1), which forbids a lawyer to make a false statement of fact to a tribunal; MR 4.1(a), which forbids a lawyer to make a false statement of material fact to a third person; and MR 8.4(c), which proscribes conductinvolving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

Nevertheless, by considering the larger legal context of the lawyer's role, by understanding inconsistent ethical rules in the light of reason, and by applying insights of moral philosophy, this article concludes that there are circumstances in which a lawyer can ethically make a false statement …

The Corporate Lawyer And 'The Perjury Trilemma', Thomas D. Morgan

Hofstra Law Review

This paper extends Monroe Freedman's idea of the criminal lawyer's "perjury trilemma" to current issues faced by corporate lawyers dealing with perceived pressures on the attorney-client privilege. The duties of criminal defense and corporate lawyers are more similar than they often seem. Corporate lawyers' duties of honesty in dealing with third parties are closely analogous to criminal lawyers' duties of honesty in dealing with a court. Both sets of lawyers also have an important interest in fostering open communications with their clients. Where their situations differ is not with respect to lawyer obligations but with respect to their clients' rights. …