Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons^™

If One Is Good, Two Must Be Better: A Comparison Of The Texas Standards For Appellate Conduct And The Texas Disciplinary Rules Of Professional Conduct., Edward L. Wilkinson

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Supreme Court of Texas and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals adopted the Standards for Appellate Conduct (Standards) on February 1, 1999. The Standards are intended to “give practitioners a valuable tool to use with clients who demand unprofessional conduct” by imposing “an affirmative duty to educate the client about the Standards of Appellate Conduct.” The Standards further state they do not “alter existing standards of conduct under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, or the Code of Judicial Conduct.” Under the Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, sanctionable conduct includes “acts or omissions…which violate one or more of the Texas …

Hall's Standards Of Review In Texas Foreword., Wallace B. Jefferson

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract Forthcoming.

Soft-Core Perjury, Leonard M. Niehoff

Articles

Despite its greater pervasiveness, however, soft-core perjury has generated considerably less discussion and debate than hard-core perjury has. There are reasons for this, but they are not good ones. Indeed, we might summarize the matter this way: Lawyers tend to dismiss the soft-core perjury problem because they do not see it as a problem. They do not see it as an ethical problem, and they do not see it as a practical problem. They are wrong on both counts.

The idea that soft-core perjury poses no ethical problem comes from the view that the lawyer's dilemma-or trilemma, if you will-arises …

The Effect Of Legal Professionalization On Moral Reasoning: A Reply To Professor Vischer And Professor Wendel, Michael Hatfield

Articles

Responding to comments made on Professionalizing Moral Deference.

The Prosecutorial Ethic: With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility, Maureen Howard

Articles

Although the American trial system has been likened to an arena in which mental combatants fight “to the death ” (the verdict ), each warrior similarly skilled and equally committed to vanquishing the other in a forum with formal rules of engagement enforced by a learned and impartial judge, the role of the criminal prosecutor is qualitatively different from that of other advocates. This is because, unlike any other lawyer, a criminal prosecutor has an affirmative duty to the opposing party.

Matthew S. Weinert On Hegel’S Laws: The Legitimacy Of A Modern Legal Order. By William E. Conklin. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008. 381pp., Matthew S. Weinert

Human Rights & Human Welfare

A review of:

Hegel’s Laws: The Legitimacy of a Modern Legal Order. By William E. Conklin. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008. 381pp.

Mapping The World: Facts And Meaning In Adjudication And Mediation, Robert Rubinson

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores what is and what is not in adjudication and mediation, thus illuminating the profound differences between these two processes. The Article does this work in four parts. First, it offers an analysis of cognitive mapmaking and its inevitability in constructing meaning. It then explores how adjudication defines meaning in a particular way. This Article then conducts a comparable analysis of mediation. Finally, it focuses on the bridging function attorneys play between the worlds of mediation and adjudication.

How Must A Lawyer Be? A Response To Woolley And Wendel, David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Legal Ethics and Moral Character, 23 GEO. J. LEGAL Ethics, Alice Woolley and W. Bradley Wendel argue that theories of legal ethics may be evaluated by examining the kind of person a lawyer must be to conform to the normative demands of the theory. In their words, theories of legal ethics musts answer questions not only of what a lawyer must do, but how a lawyer must be. Woolley and Wendel examine three theories of legal ethics—those of Charles Fried, William Simon, and myself—and conclude that the theories they discuss impose demands on agency that are not realistic, functional, …

The Conscience Of A Prosecutor, David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay, a version of the 2010 Tabor Lecture at Valparaiso Law School, examines issues about the role of a prosecutor in the adversary system through the lens of the following question: Should a prosecutor throw a case to avoid keeping men who he thinks are innocent in prison? This issue came to prominence in 2008, when Daniel Bibb, a New York City prosecutor, told newspaper reporters that he had done so in connection with a 1991 murder conviction that he had been assigned to reinvestigate after new evidence emerged that the wrong men had been convicted and were serving …

David Luban, Review Of Daniel Markovits, A Modern Legal Ethics: Adversary Advocacy In A Democratic Age, David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Daniel Markovits offers a novel defense of the traditional partisan advocate’s role, based on the demands of personal integrity. Although he insists that the adversary system requires lawyers to lie and cheat (regardless of the particular ethics rules in place), it is possible to redescribe these lawyerly vices as the virtue of fidelity to a client, expressed through what John Keats called “negative capability”—a suppression of the self in order to allow someone else’s story to shine forth. These are first-personal moral ideals, and Markovits argues against the primacy of second- and third-personal moral ideals (such as Kantianism and utilitarianism) …

The Rule Of Law And Human Dignity: Reexamining Fuller’S Canons, David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Lon Fuller offered an analysis of the rule of law in the form of eight ‘canons’ of lawmaking. He argued (1) that these canons constitute a ‘procedural natural law’, as distinct from traditional ‘substantive’ natural law; but also (2) that lawmaking conforming to the canons will enhance human dignity—a ‘substantive’ result. This paper argues the following points: first, that Fuller mischaracterized his eight canons, which are substantive rather than procedural; second, that there is an important sense in which they enhance human dignity; third, that they fail to enhance human dignity to the fullest extent because they understand it in …

Rights Talk And Patient Subjectivity: The Role Of Autonomy, Equality And Participation Norms, Nan D. Hunter

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Patients themselves have transformed the role of the patient in the health care system, making it far more complex than it ever has been before. As a result, the conceptual root of our contemporary understandings of “patient” is an assumption of autonomous subjectivity, i.e., of an individual aware of and capable of acting on her choices for medical care. The Symposium on Patient-Centered Health Law and Ethics of which this Article is a part considers the most recent stage in this evolution of meanings: the concept of patient-centeredness, with its implication of provider deference to the patient’s perspective. Throughout the …

Colorado Legal Ethics: Guide To Resources, Robert M. Linz

Publications

No abstract provided.

What's Love Got To Do With It?: Contemporary Lessons On Lawyerly Advocacy From The Preacher Martin Luther King, Jr., Deborah J. Cantrell

Publications

Lawyers have long been inspired by the advocacy work of Martin Luther King, Jr. From his work on the Montgomery bus boycott, to lunch counter sit-ins, to his March on Washington, Dr. King demonstrated skilled advocacy that resulted in important legal advancements. While lawyers give primacy to Dr. King as an advocate, Dr. King gave primacy to his work as a preacher. This article challenges the legal profession to consider the ways in which Dr. King, the preacher, may be as inspirational and instructive as Dr. King, the civil rights icon. Just as Dr. King's religious values were not abstracted …

Giving Unconscionability More Muscle: Attorney's Fees As A Remedy For Contractual Overreaching, Stephen E. Friedman

Georgia Law Review

This Article seeks to broaden the conversation about unconscionability. While most of the discussion has focused on the appropriate standard for determining unconscionability, this Article focuses on the appropriate remedy to be imposed when unconscionability is found. The current remedy for unconscionability is nonenforcement or limited enforcement of unconscionable contracts or contract terms. This remedy is inadequate and seriously undermines unconscionability's effectiveness as a tool for policing against contractual overreaching. The Article proposes that courts be given discretion to award attorney's fees to consumers who successfully establish the unconscionability of a standard form contract. Such a remedy would enable unconscionability …

Robinson Everett: The Citizen Lawyer Ideal Lives On, David F. Levi

Faculty Scholarship

In this tribute to Professor Robinson O. Everett, Dean David Levi questions the view that the citizen-lawyer or lawyer-statesmen models are in decline. Tracing Professor Everett’s varied career, accomplishments, and commitments to individuals and institutions; Levi contends that Everett combined the lawyer's traditional focus on the individual with an overall dedication to the larger community. Everett was not just a model citizen; he was a lawyer-citizen. Levi contends that the survival of the lawyer-citizen and lawyer-statesmen models is a matter of choice and character. Nothing in the current structure of the legal economy places these models out of reach for …