What can a lawyer tell the court when moving to withdraw from a case without revealing the client's confidences?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addresses the tension a lawyer faces when a court requires a showing of "good cause" to withdraw but the reasons for withdrawal are protected by the duty of confidentiality. Using a hypothetical where a non-paying client also insists the lawyer present a contract the client admits is fake, the opinion concludes that the lawyer's initial motion should simply state that "professional considerations" or irreconcilable differences require termination, a statement the ARPC 1.16 commentary says "ordinarily should be accepted as sufficient."

If the court asks for more, the opinion holds the lawyer may disclose information about the unpaid invoices to the extent reasonably necessary to accomplish withdrawal, potentially under seal, because ARPC 1.6(b)(5) permits revealing a confidence or secret to establish the lawyer's claim in a controversy with the client (including fee nonpayment). The client's admission that the contract is fake, however, is a confidence the lawyer should not disclose unless ordered, because on these facts no false evidence was actually offered and so ARPC 3.3's remedial duties were not triggered; instead the lawyer faces a mandatory withdrawal under ARPC 1.16(a)(1)(A).

The opinion lays out an escalating sequence: file a motion with no confidential information; if pressed, remind the court that the "professional considerations" statement should suffice and raise privilege and Rule 1.6 arguments; if the court still orders disclosure, consult the client about a possible appeal under ARPC 1.4; and if compelled, disclose only what is reasonably necessary, seeking in camera and under-seal protection. The opinion notes that Alaska's confidentiality rule is narrower than ABA Model Rule 1.6 because it protects only a client's "confidence or secret" rather than all "information relating to the representation."

In practice

Under this opinion, a withdrawal motion that states only that professional considerations require termination of the representation discloses no confidence or secret and ordinarily should be accepted. Where the court demands more, the opinion describes conduct that stays within the rules: disclose only what is reasonably necessary to achieve withdrawal, invoke privilege and confidentiality, request protective measures such as in camera review and sealing, and reserve fuller disclosure for an actual court order, consulting the client about appeal first. The opinion distinguishes a fee-based justification (permitted in part under ARPC 1.6(b)(5)) from a client's confidence about intended false evidence (not to be disclosed absent an order, where no false evidence was offered).

Common questions

Q: What should a lawyer put in a motion to withdraw when the client opposes it?

A: The opinion holds the initial motion should simply state that professional considerations or irreconcilable differences require termination, which under the ARPC 1.16 commentary ordinarily should be accepted as sufficient and discloses no confidence or secret.

Q: Can a lawyer tell the court the client did not pay?

A: To a degree. The opinion holds the lawyer may disclose information about unpaid invoices to the extent reasonably necessary to accomplish withdrawal, relying on ARPC 1.6(b)(5), and should consider filing it under seal to minimize disclosure.

Q: If the client wants the lawyer to use a document the client admits is fake, can the lawyer tell the court that?

A: Not on these facts. The opinion holds the lawyer should not disclose that confidence unless ordered, because no false evidence was actually offered, so ARPC 3.3's remedial duties were not triggered; the lawyer instead has a mandatory duty to withdraw under ARPC 1.16(a)(1)(A).

Q: What if the court orders the lawyer to reveal confidential information?

A: The opinion holds the lawyer must first consult the client about a possible appeal under ARPC 1.4, and if compelled, disclose only what is reasonably necessary to comply with the order while seeking in camera and under-seal protection.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets ARPC 1.16 (declining or terminating representation), ARPC 1.6 (confidentiality of a client's confidence or secret), ARPC 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal), and ARPC 1.4 (communication, including about a possible appeal of a disclosure order). It quotes the ARPC 1.16 commentary that a lawyer's statement that professional considerations require termination "ordinarily should be accepted as sufficient," and explains that Alaska's Rule 1.6 is deliberately narrower than ABA Model Rule 1.6(a). The opinion draws several concepts from ABA Formal Opinion 519 (2025) and ABA Formal Opinion 476 (2016).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 1.16 / ARPC 1.16 (declining or terminating representation; good cause)
• Model Rule 1.6 / ARPC 1.6 (confidentiality; exceptions in 1.6(b))
• Model Rule 3.3 / ARPC 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal)
• Model Rule 1.4 / ARPC 1.4 (communication; consulting about appeal)

Cases:

• Pederson v. Barnes, 139 P.3d 552 (Alaska 2006), disclosure to prevent client crime injuring another's property

Other opinions cited:

• ABA Formal Op. 519 (2025): disclosures in motions to withdraw
• ABA Formal Op. 476 (2016): confidentiality and withdrawal for unpaid fees

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 476: Withdrawal for Unpaid Fees
• AK Ethics Op. 2022-2: Client False Statements to Court

Source

• Landing page: https://alaskabar.org/ethics-discipline/ethics-opinions/adopted-ethics-opinions-chronological/
• Original PDF: https://alaskabar.org/wp-content/uploads/2026-1.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

ALASKA BAR ASSOCIATION
ETHICS OPINION NO. 2026-1
What to Disclose (and Not to Disclose) to a Court When Seeking to
Withdraw from a Representation
ISSUE PRESENTED
Lawyers who wish to terminate a representation may be required to
file a motion and demonstrate “good cause” why the representation should
be terminated. When explaining these reasons, however, lawyers have an
ethical duty to protect the client’s confidences and secrets. What
information related to the representation may and may not be disclosed to
the tribunal in these circumstances?
Consider the following scenario: Lawyer is defending Client in a
lawsuit by a contractor. The contractor alleges that Client failed to pay
him for services rendered and misled him about the scope of the work.
Client’s credibility will be key to the defense in this bench trial.
Unfortunately, the working relationship between Lawyer and Client has
been steadily deteriorating as the case has progressed. Client has failed
to pay multiple invoices (despite warnings from Lawyer that this may
necessitate Lawyer’s withdrawal). Client now demands that Lawyer
present as evidence a contract that purports to cover the underlying
transaction, but Client confides to Lawyer that the contract is a fake.
Lawyer decides this is the final straw and files a motion to withdraw from
the representation, but Client opposes the motion. What, if anything, may
Lawyer tell the court in the original motion? If the court asks for additional
detail about why withdrawal is appropriate here, what may the Lawyer say
in response?
CONCLUSION
A lawyer has a duty to protect her or his client’s confidences and
secrets under Rule 1.6, including when the lawyer notifies (or requests
permission from) a tribunal regarding a withdrawal from that
representation. Absent informed client consent or application of one of
Rule 1.6’s exceptions, the lawyer must therefore take care to limit any
discussion of information related to the representation so that any such
confidence or secret is protected to the extent possible.
In the hypothetical above, Lawyer’s original motion seeking to
withdraw from the representation should simply state that professional
considerations or irreconcilable differences require termination of the
representation. In response to the court’s follow-up inquiry, Lawyer may
disclose information about the unpaid invoices to the extent Lawyer
1

reasonably believes the disclosure is necessary to accomplish the
withdrawal. This may necessitate filing this information under seal in
order to minimize disclosure. With respect to Client’s insistence that
Lawyer present false evidence, Lawyer should not disclose this confidential
communication unless ordered to do so.1 Lawyer should first remind the
court that the lawyer’s statement that professional considerations require
termination of the representation should ordinarily be accepted as
sufficient, particularly when Lawyer is bound to keep confidential the facts
that would constitute an explanation for the withdrawal. If the court
insists on additional information, Lawyer should assert nonfrivolous
arguments as to why the information is protected by the attorney-client
privilege or other applicable law. If the court rules that the information
must be disclosed, Lawyer must consult with Client about the possibility
of an appeal before disclosing the information.
APPLICABLE RULES
Rules 1.16, 1.6, 3.3, 1.4.
ANALYSIS
A lawyer who wishes to withdraw from the representation of a client
may be required to file a motion requesting permission from the court for
that withdrawal.2 This is generally a “non-event” if the client consents to
that action (especially if this occurs early in the case and/or other counsel
is available to substitute into the case). If the client has declined to
consent to that withdrawal, however, the court may still grant that motion
for “good cause.”3 This generally requires the lawyer to provide the court
1 In this hypothetical, Lawyer did not actually offer any false evidence and

so the duty to take certain remedial measures under Rule 3.3(a)(3),
including potentially disclosing that information to the court, was not
triggered. Instead, Lawyer has a mandatory duty to terminate the
representation under Rule 1.16(a)(1)(A). See Rule 1.16 cmt (Mandatory
Withdrawal) (“A lawyer ordinarily must decline or withdraw from
representation if the client demands that the lawyer engage in conduct
that is illegal or violates the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.”).
2 See Alaska R. Civ. P. 81(e)(1)(C); Alaska R. Crim. P. 50(a) (noting that the

Rules of Civil Procedure relating to the withdrawal of an attorney for a
party shall apply to attorneys retained to represent an accused in a
criminal action); Rule 1.16(c) (requiring a lawyer to “comply with applicable
law requiring notice to or permission of a tribunal when terminating a
representation”).
3 Alaska R. Civ. P. 81(e)(1)(C).

2

with some valid reason for the withdrawal request.
This Opinion
addresses what information may and may not be disclosed to the court
when seeking to demonstrate that good cause exists for a withdrawal,
consistent with the lawyer’s ethical obligations.
There are many reasons why withdrawal from a representation may
be completely valid. Sometimes withdrawal is mandatory if, for example,
the representation will result in the lawyer’s violation of the rules of
professional conduct.4
Other times withdrawal is permissive and
justifiable if, for example, “the representation will result in an
unreasonable financial burden on the lawyer or has been rendered
unreasonably difficult by the client.”5 When the lawyer is representing the
client in pending litigation, court approval or notice to the court is
generally required in order to effectuate the withdrawal.6 The Commentary
to Rule 1.16 identifies an ethical problem the lawyer may face when
providing such notice:
Difficulty may be encountered if withdrawal is based on the
client’s demand that the lawyer engage in unprofessional
conduct. The court may request an explanation for the
withdrawal, while the lawyer may be bound to keep
confidential the facts that would constitute such an
explanation. The lawyer’s statement that professional
considerations require termination of the representation
ordinarily should be accepted as sufficient. Lawyers should be
mindful of their obligations to both clients and the court under
Rules 1.6 and 3.3.
To aid both lawyers and judges in addressing these issues, this Opinion
describes the lawyer’s obligations to clients and the court under Rules 1.6
and 3.3. The Opinion then provides guidance about how lawyers should
(and, in some cases, must) address these issues when explaining to a court
why withdrawal is appropriate.
Rule 1.6 – The Lawyer’s Duty to Preserve a Client’s Confidence or Secret.

4 See generally Rule 1.16(a).

Rule 1.16(b)(6).
Other permissive grounds for terminating a
representation are discussed in Rule 1.16(b).
5

6 Rule 1.16 cmt (“Similarly, court approval or notice to the court is often

required by applicable law before a lawyer withdraws from pending
litigation.”).
3

The lawyer’s duty of confidentiality is described in Rule 1.6(a):
A lawyer shall not reveal a client’s confidence or secret unless
the client gives informed consent, except for disclosures that
are impliedly authorized in order to carry out the
representation and disclosures permitted by paragraph (b)
below or Rule 3.3. For purposes of this rule, “confidence”
means information protected by the attorney-client privilege
under applicable law, and “secret” means other information
gained in the professional relationship if the client has
requested it be held confidential or if it is reasonably
foreseeable that disclosure of the information would be
embarrassing or detrimental to the client. In determining
whether information relating to representation of a client is
protected from disclosure under this rule, the lawyer shall
resolve any uncertainty about whether such information can
be revealed against revealing the information.
Lawyers therefore must not disclose a client’s “confidences” or “secrets”
unless: (1) the client gives informed consent;7 (2) such disclosure is
impliedly authorized to carry out the representation (e.g., admitting
undisputed facts); (3) one of the exceptions in Rule 1.6(b) applies (e.g.,
complying with a court order); or (4) Rule 3.3. is triggered (discussed
below).8
It is important to note that Rule 1.6’s prohibition applies to disclosure of
a client’s confidences or secrets to any third party, including a court.9
Absent consent or one of the other exceptions noted above, this restriction
impacts what a lawyer can and cannot disclose as part of any motion
seeking to establish good cause for withdrawing from a representation.
Rule 3.3 – Candor Toward the Tribunal.

7 Rule 9.1(g) (defining “informed consent”).

The nature of these various exceptions is beyond the scope of this
Opinion.
8

9 Cf. Pederson v. Barnes, 139 P.3d 552, 557 n.10 (Alaska 2006) (noting

that Rule 1.6(b)(1) permits lawyers to disclose confidential client
information to a court when the lawyer believes that the disclosure is
reasonably necessary to prevent a crime by the client that is likely to result
in substantial injury to the property of another).
4

“A lawyer acting as an advocate in an adjudicative proceeding has
an obligation to present the client’s case with persuasive force.
Performance of that duty while maintaining confidences and secrets of the
client, however, is qualified by the advocate’s duty of candor to the
tribunal.”10 Rule 3.3 thus imposes a variety of affirmative duties on
lawyers when communicating with the court, including the duty to
disclose a client’s confidences or secrets under certain circumstances. Put
differently, the lawyer’s duty to protect the client’s confidences and secrets
is necessarily subservient to the lawyer’s duty not to mislead the court.
This duty comes in several forms. For example, a lawyer has a duty
to correct a false statement of material fact that was previously made to
the court.11 The lawyer also has a duty to take reasonable and timely
remedial measures if she or he learns that the lawyer’s client (or the lawyer
or a witness called by the lawyer) offered false material evidence to the
court. This can include disclosure to the court, if necessary.12 Likewise,
if the lawyer knows that her or his client plans to engage in criminal or
fraudulent conduct related to an adjudicative proceeding, the lawyer may
also be required to disclose that to the court.13
What Are Appropriate Disclosures in a Motion Seeking to Withdraw from
a Representation?14
If a lawyer is required to demonstrate “good cause” for seeking to
withdraw from a representation, the lawyer has several options for
satisfying that demonstration without violating Rule 1.6’s duty of
confidentiality.

10 Rule 3.3 cmt.
11 Rule 3.3(a)(1)
12 Rule 3.3(a)(3).
13 Rule 3.3(b).
14 Several of these concepts are borrowed from ABA Formal Opinion 519

(Dec. 3, 2025). The analysis differs somewhat because the duty of
confidentiality under Alaska’s rules of professional conduct is narrower
than the ABA’s Model Rule 1.6(a); the former is limited to the protection of
“a client’s confidence or secret,” while the latter generally prohibits the
disclosure of any “information relating to the representation” absent
consent or an exception to the rule. See Rule 1.6 cmt (finding that the
ABA’s approach “was excessively broad”).
5

First, to state the obvious, not all reasons for withdrawing from a
representation implicate Rule 1.6. A lawyer is free to disclose to the court
that the lawyer’s own physical or mental impairment (e.g., a recent
surgery) materially impairs the lawyer’s ability to represent the client,15
since this disclosure does not include any secret or confidence of the client.
Second, if the lawyer has an affirmative ethical obligation to disclose
certain information, the lawyer must do so notwithstanding Rule 1.6. In
particular, Rule 3.3(c) emphasizes that the disclosure duties stated in
Rules 3.3(a) and (b)—regarding the offering of false evidence or criminal or
fraudulent conduct related to an adjudicative proceeding—“apply even if
compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule
1.6.”16 It is important to note here that, while a lawyer is obliged to take
certain “reasonable and timely remedial measures” in response to
violations of Rules 3.3(a) and (b), these remedial measures do not always
include disclosure of confidential information. Instead, the rules provide
that these remedial measures include, “if necessary, disclosure to the
tribunal.”17 To the extent that such disclosures are necessary, however,
they supersede the confidentiality protections of Rule 1.6.
Third, the lawyer may obtain the client’s informed consent for any
disclosure.18 In order to obtain such consent, the lawyer will need to
adequately explain the material risks of, and the reasonably available
alternatives to, making such a disclosure. If informed consent is obtained,
then the disclosure of the client’s confidence or secret does not violate Rule
1.6. (If the client has not consented to the lawyer’s withdrawal from the
representation, however, it may be difficult to obtain informed consent for
this type of disclosure.)
Fourth, the lawyer may and should simply tell the court that
“professional considerations require termination of the representation,”19
since such a statement does not disclose any confidence or secret. As the
Commentary to Rule 1.16 notes, this “ordinarily should be accepted as
sufficient” because it alerts the court that the withdrawal is triggered by
15 Rule 1.16(a)(1)(B).
16 Rule 3.3(c).
17 Rule 3.3(a)(3); Rule 3.3(b).

Rule 1.6(a) (“A lawyer shall not reveal a client’s confidence or secret
unless the client gives informed consent….”); Rule 9.1(g).
18

19 Rule 1.16 cmt.

6

one or more of the ethics rules and that any additional inquiry may
necessitate the disclosure of confidential information.
Fifth, some disclosures of confidential information—including
information regarding fee disputes—are permitted under Rule 1.6(b).20
These include, for example, disclosures that the lawyer reasonably believes
to be necessary to prevent certain crimes, frauds, or wrongful
incarcerations.21 Lawyers may also reveal a client’s confidence or secret
to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to establish a claim
on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the
client.22
This has been interpreted to cover disputes regarding
nonpayment of the lawyer’s fees.23 Note, however, that the exception only
applies “to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary” to address
the issue.24 It is therefore advisable for the lawyer to avoid addressing or
disclosing any such confidential information in the first instance unless
the lawyer reasonably believes it is necessary to achieve withdrawal.
Presumably if the court is unsatisfied with the original motion and requires
additional information, the lawyer will have an additional opportunity to
provide that information with appropriate protections.
In that
circumstance, the lawyer should ask the court to limit access to the
confidential information to the court or to those few people with a
legitimate need to know that information, whether by seeking a protective
order or making an in camera submission under seal or otherwise.25 A
lawyer might also consider requesting that another judge hear the
additional information to avoid prejudicing the client, especially if the trial
judge will be the fact finder in the client’s case.
Finally, if all else fails, disclosure of the client’s confidence or secret
is permitted to comply with other law or a court order under Rule 1.6(b)(6).
20 As noted above, disclosure is also permitted if impliedly authorized in

order to carry out the representation, see Rule 1.6(a), but this has no
application to a motion to withdraw.
21 Rule 1.6(b).
22 Rule 1.6(b)(5).
23 ABA Formal Opinion 476 (2016).
24 Rule 1.6(b); Rule 1.6 cmt (“Paragraph (b) permits disclosure only to the

extent the lawyer reasonably believes the disclosure is necessary to
accomplish one of the purposes specified.”).
25 Rule 1.6 cmt; ABA Formal Opinion 476.

7

If the court orders disclosure of the information, the lawyer may comply
without violating Rule 1.6. Before reaching that point, however, the lawyer
should make reasonable efforts to protect the confidential information in
the following ways:
•

Submit an initial motion that provides no confidential client
information and simply states that “professional considerations
require termination of the representation” or words to that effect.

•

If the court requests additional justification, remind the court of
Rule 1.16’s Commentary that the above statement “ordinarily
should be accepted as sufficient,” particularly when providing
additional justification would require the disclosure of a client’s
confidences or secrets. If and as necessary, the lawyer should also
raise arguments as to why production of the requested information
is at odds with the attorney-client privilege and/or Rule 1.6. The
lawyer should alert the court that disclosure of this information is
prohibited unless and until there is a court order requiring its
disclosure.

•

If the court rejects these arguments and orders the disclosure of the
confidential information, the lawyer must consult with the client
about a possible appeal to the extent required by Rule 1.4.26

• If forced to disclose the confidential information by court order, the

lawyer should seek to disclose only the information to the extent
“reasonably necessary” to abide by the order while still taking
reasonable steps to protect the confidentiality of that information
(e.g., by requesting that the information be provided in camera and
under seal).27 As reflected above, this means the lawyer should only
disclose what is necessary to achieve withdrawal, supplementing
that disclosure if and as necessary (with appropriate safeguards) so
that the court has sufficient information to rule on the withdrawal
request without unduly prejudicing the client.

26 Rule 1.6 cmt.
27 The Commentary to Rule 1.6 notes that Rule 1.6(b) “permits disclosure

only to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes the disclosure is
necessary to accomplish one of the purposes specified.” The lawyer
should, of course, comply in full with any court order requiring disclosure
of confidential information. In so doing, the lawyer should take care to
disclose that information only to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes
is necessary to comply with that order and otherwise seek to protect the
confidentiality of that information to the extent practicable.
8

Approved by the Alaska Bar Association Ethics Committee on April 2,
2026.
Adopted by the Board of Governors on April 29, 2026.

9