|
NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATIONCommittee on
Professional Ethics Opinion #377 - 03/26/1975 (7-75)
Topic: Confidential or secret information sought by governmental
agency
Digest: Confidential or secret information may not be revealed unless
permitted by Code or required by law or court order
Code: Canon 4; DR 4-101(C)(2); EC 4-4
QUESTION
When a client is under investigation by a governmental agency with
regard to a completed transaction, may his attorney in the absence of
the client's consent furnish the investigators with photo static copies
of checks drawn from the attorney's escrow account in the
transaction?
OPINION
A lawyer may not ordinarily turn over such instruments without being
directed to do so by a proper tribunal or being required by law. Whether
a communication between a lawyer and his client is confidential and
privileged is a matter of law, not ethics. ABA 247 (1942). Likewise, the
interpretation of a statutory direction is a matter of law, not
ethics.
However, a lawyer should preserve the confidences and secrets of a
client. Canon 4. This concept, as an ethical precept is not as limited
as the concept of the attorney-client privilege, and exists without
regard to the nature or source of information or the fact that others
share the knowledge. EC 4-4. A confidence or secret may be revealed by a
lawyer when permitted under Disciplinary Rules or required by law or
court order. DR 4-101(C)(2).
This committee does not answer questions of law. Whether certain
information, sought by a governmental agency, known to the lawyer, is to
be considered a privileged communication that may not be communicated,
is a question of law. ABA Inf. 393 (1961).
Without specific statutory direction, when public authorities demand
that a lawyer turn over documents that may be secret, and not protected
by the attorney-client privilege, the lawyer should assert that he
received the documents in confidence and thereafter abide by the
determination of the tribunal to which the solution of the question may
be committed. N.Y. County 462 (1958); N.Y. City 312 (1934); DR
4-101(C)(2); EC 4-4. The fact that the attorney may thereafter be
directed to turn over the documents, O'Donnell v. Sullivan, 364 F.2d 43
(1st Cir. 1966) cert. denied 385 U.S. 969 (1966), does not negate the
Disciplinary Rules or Ethical Considerations under Canon 4. See, N.Y.
State 168 (1970); N.Y. State 183 (1971).
Related Files
Opinion 377 (Adobe PDF File)
|