Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons^™

Insuring Rule 11 Sanctions, Cary Coglianese

Michigan Law Review

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires courts to sanction attorneys who file frivolous papers. Since 1983, when the rule was amended, attorney sanctions have emerged as an increasingly significant aspect of civil litigation in the United States.

Can these and other attorneys find coverage for sanctions under their existing policies? Should they be allowed to obtain coverage for sanctions at all? This Note addresses these questions and attempts to sketch the landscape surrounding the looming issue of insurance coverage for rule 11 sanctions. To determine whether sanctions can and should be insurable, it is necessary first to understand the …

Under Advisement: Attorney Fee Forfeiture And The Supreme Court, Stacy Caplow

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Through A Glass, Darkly: How The Court Sees Motions To Disqualify Criminal Defense Lawyers , Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

Although raised frequently in the lower courts, the question of what the trial judge's role is in conflict-of-interest cases has, for nearly half a century, lurked in the background of the Supreme Court's decisions concerning the scope of a criminal defendant's right to the undivided loyalty of his attorney. Last term, as its conflict-of-interest jurisprudence reached middle age, the Court had the opportunity to articulate its views on that question. In Wheat v. United States, the Court held that a trial judge has discretion to disqualify defense counsel, even over the defendant's objection, if a serious possibility for a conflict …

Heaven Help The Lawyer For A Civil Liar, Steven H. Goldberg

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In April of 1987, the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued Formal Opinion 87-353. Influenced by the problem of a criminal defendant's potential perjury, as discussed in Nix v. Whiteside, the Formal Opinion focuses on subsection 3.3(a)(2) of Model Rule 3.3, rather than on subsection 3.3(a)(4). As a result, the Opinion advises all lawyers — civil and criminal — who know that their clients will lie to the jury, to “disclose the client's intention to testify falsely to the tribunal,” unless they can withdraw from the representation or prohibit the prospective lie. It advises lawyers …