Can a Florida lawyer disclose a deceased client's confidential information to the estate's personal representative, beneficiaries, or heirs?

Plain-English summary

At the Board of Governors' request, the committee addressed a lawyer's confidentiality obligations when the personal representative, beneficiaries, or heirs-at-law of a decedent's estate, or their counsel, request information about the decedent. The opinion is limited to the situation where the decedent's lawyer does not represent the personal representative, and it stresses that the answer depends on who is asking, what is sought, and why.

The opinion distinguishes confidentiality from privilege. Under Rule 4-1.6, all information relating to a client's representation is confidential and may not be voluntarily disclosed without the client's consent or an applicable exception, and the duty continues after the client's death. Privilege, under Florida Statutes section 90.502, is the narrower evidentiary protection that arises when a lawyer is compelled by a court to testify. The most likely applicable exception is Rule 4-1.6(c)(1), permitting disclosure "to serve the client's interest unless it is information the client specifically requires not to be disclosed."

Applying that exception, the opinion gives examples. A lawyer who did estate planning may disclose information to the personal representative where disclosure would aid proper distribution of the estate according to the decedent's wishes, unless the decedent required confidentiality (as in Opinion 72-40, where a client told the lawyer to "forget" certain bearer bonds). A lawyer may provide a will or execution information to a beneficiary or heir where the lawyer reasonably believes it would forestall litigation and conserve estate assets, but may not disclose information the decedent specifically directed be kept secret. A lawyer who represented the decedent on non-estate-planning matters (for example, a criminal defense) has no implied authorization to disclose to the personal representative. When compelled by subpoena, the lawyer acts ethically by complying as to nonprivileged information while raising privilege on the decedent's behalf where there is a good-faith basis and letting the court decide. The opinion concludes that doubts about whether information should be voluntarily disclosed are resolved in favor of nondisclosure.

In practice

Under the Florida rule as it stood at the time of this 2011 opinion, whether a lawyer may disclose a deceased client's confidential information turns on the requester, the information sought, and whether disclosure serves the deceased client's interests, with the duty of confidentiality surviving death. The opinion makes the controlling factor the Rule 4-1.6(c)(1) "serve the client's interest" exception, subject to any specific instruction from the client not to disclose. It distinguishes voluntary disclosure from compelled disclosure: under a subpoena the lawyer complies as to nonprivileged information and raises privilege where a good-faith basis exists, leaving the privilege question to the court. The opinion directs that doubts be resolved in favor of nondisclosure.

Common questions

Q: Does a lawyer's duty of confidentiality end when the client dies?

A: No. The opinion states the duty of confidentiality continues after the client-lawyer relationship has terminated and survives the client's death.

Q: Can a lawyer hand the decedent's file to the estate's personal representative?

A: It depends. The opinion concludes a lawyer who did the decedent's estate planning may disclose information to serve the decedent's interest in proper distribution, unless the decedent specifically required it be kept confidential. A lawyer who handled an unrelated matter, such as a criminal defense, has no such implied authorization.

Q: What if a beneficiary or heir asks for the will?

A: Per the opinion, the lawyer may provide a copy of the will or information about its execution where the lawyer reasonably believes disclosure would forestall litigation and conserve estate assets, but may not disclose information the decedent specifically instructed be kept secret.

Q: What does the lawyer do when served with a subpoena?

A: The opinion concludes the lawyer must comply as to any nonprivileged information sought, raise the appropriate privilege on the decedent's behalf where there is a good-faith basis, and not disclose information believed in good faith to be privileged until the court orders it.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rule 4-1.6 (confidentiality of information, Model Rule 1.6) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, distinguishing the broad ethical duty of confidentiality from the narrower attorney-client privilege under Florida Statutes section 90.502. It applies the Rule 4-1.6(c)(1) exception permitting disclosure to serve the client's interest, and relies on prior Florida opinions on post-death confidentiality.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 1.6 / Fla. Rule 4-1.6 (confidentiality of information)

Statutes:

• Fla. Stat. § 90.502 (lawyer-client privilege)

Other opinions cited:

• Fla. Ethics Op. 92-5 (lawyer ordinarily should not voluntarily disclose representation information)
• Fla. Ethics Op. 72-40 (duty to preserve confidences survives death; "forget" the bearer bonds)
• Fla. Ethics Ops. 65-7, 70-40, 71-29 (compelled disclosure and appellate remedies)

See also

• Florida Bar Op. 20-1: Responding to Negative Online Reviews
• Florida Bar Op. 25-1: Listservs and Client Confidentiality

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-10-3/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-10-3.pdf

Original opinion text

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

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 10-3
February 1, 2011
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
A lawyer’s ethical obligations regarding a request for confidential information of a
deceased client by the personal representative, beneficiaries or heirs-at-law of a decedent’s
estate, or their counsel, will vary depending on the circumstances. A lawyer may disclose
confidential information to serve the deceased client’s interests, unless the deceased client
previously instructed the lawyer not to disclose the information. Whether and what information
may be disclosed will depend on who is making the request, the information sought, and other
factors. Doubt should be resolved in favor of nondisclosure. When compelled to disclose
information via subpoena, a lawyer must disclose all information sought that is not privileged,
and raise privilege as to any information for which there is a good faith basis to do so.
RPC: 4-1.6
Opinions: 65-7, 70-40, 71-29, 72-40, 92-5
Statutes: §90.502
The Professional Ethics Committee has been requested by the Florida Bar Board of
Governors to render an advisory opinion on the issue of the ethical obligations of a lawyer when
the personal representative, beneficiaries or heirs-at-law of a decedent’s estate, or their counsel
request confidential information regarding a decedent. This opinion addresses only the situation
where the decedent’s lawyer does not represent the personal representative. The analysis of the
issue is the same for each person who may request such information, although the answer for
each will depend on the individual facts and circumstances of the particular situation and may
differ, depending on who is requesting the information and why.
Although a lawyer’s ethical obligation of confidentiality and the evidentiary matter of
attorney-client privilege are related, the two issues are distinct. Confidentiality is much broader
than privilege. According to Rule 4-1.6, Rules of Professional Conduct, all information relating
to a client’s representation is confidential and may not be voluntarily disclosed by the lawyer
without either the client’s consent or the application of a relevant exception to the confidentiality
rule. The comment to Rule 4-1.6 provides further guidance, in stating: “[t]he confidentiality
rule applies not merely to matters communicated in confidence by the client but also to all
information relating to the representation, whatever its source.” On the other hand, privilege is
much narrower as an evidentiary matter set forth in Florida Statutes § 90.502, which provides
generally that a lawyer cannot be compelled to disclose communications between a lawyer and
client that were made for the purpose of seeking and/or receiving legal advice without the
client’s consent or other waiver. Questions of confidentiality arise any time a lawyer is asked to
disclose information relating to a client’s representation. The question of privilege only arises
when a lawyer is compelled by a court, i.e. via subpoena, to disclose confidential
communications made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. Regarding privilege, the
comment to Rule 4-1.6 provides as follows:

Page 2

If a lawyer is called as a witness to give testimony concerning a client, absent
waiver by the client, rule 4-1.6(a) requires the lawyer to invoke the privilege
when it is applicable. The lawyer must comply with the final orders of a court or
other tribunal of competent jurisdiction requiring the lawyer to give information
about the client.
Rule 4-1.6 provides as follows:
(a) Consent Required to Reveal Information. A lawyer shall not reveal
information relating to representation of a client except as stated in subdivisions
(b), (c), and (d), unless the client gives informed consent.
(b) When Lawyer Must Reveal Information. A lawyer shall reveal such
information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:
(1) to prevent a client from committing a crime; or
(2) to prevent a death or substantial bodily harm to another.
(c) When Lawyer May Reveal Information. A lawyer may reveal such
information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:
(1) to serve the client’s interest unless it is information the client
specifically requires not to be disclosed;
(2) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy
between the lawyer and client;
(3) to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the
lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was involved;
(4) to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer’s
representation of the client; or
(5) to comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct.
(d) Exhaustion of Appellate Remedies. When required by a tribunal to
reveal such information, a lawyer may first exhaust all appellate remedies.
(e) Limitation on Amount of Disclosure. When disclosure is mandated or
permitted, the lawyer shall disclose no more information than is required to meet
the requirements or accomplish the purposes of this rule.
The comment to the rule states that “[t]he duty of confidentiality continues after the
client-lawyer relationship has terminated.”
A request for information from a personal representative, beneficiaries or heirs-at-law of
a decedent’s estate, or their counsel will generally involve information “relating to the

Page 3

representation of a client,” and a lawyer ordinarily should not voluntarily disclose such
information. See Florida Ethics Opinion 92-5. There are exceptions to the confidentiality rule
that either require or permit a lawyer to disclose confidential information. See Rule 4-1.6(b) and
(c), Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. The Committee cannot envision every instance in which
a personal representative, beneficiaries or heirs-at-law of a decedent’s estate, or their counsel
may request information from a decedent’s lawyer, but will provide several examples in an effort
to illustrate the appropriate analysis.
The exception to the confidentiality rule that is most likely to apply in such requests is set
forth in subdivision (c)(1): “to serve the client’s interest unless it is information the client
specifically requires not to be disclosed.” Thus, if a personal representative asks for confidential
information relating to a decedent’s estate plan and the decedent’s lawyer determines that
disclosure of the information would aid in the proper distribution of the decedent’s estate
according to the decedent’s wishes, the lawyer may properly disclose the information to the
personal representative, unless the decedent specifically required that the information be kept
confidential. For example, in Florida Ethics Opinion 72-40, a client instructed the inquiring
lawyer who was hired to assist the client with estate planning to “forget” that the client had a
“large amount of bearer bonds, registered jointly with his wife.” The opinion concludes that the
lawyer may not disclose the existence of these assets to the bank which was to be the sole
executor of the client’s estate unless the client gave consent to the disclosure or unless ordered to
do so by a court, whether the inquiry was made before or after the client’s death. The opinion
states that “the duty to preserve a client’s confidences survives his death. . . .” Thus, a lawyer
must undertake the appropriate analysis under the confidentiality rule, even if it is the personal
representative who requests information of the decedent from a lawyer who assisted in the
decedent’s estate planning and the information sought relates specifically to that estate plan.
Similarly, if a beneficiary or heir-at-law asks for specific information and the decedent’s
lawyer determines that voluntary disclosure of the information would serve the decedent’s
interests, the lawyer may disclose that specific information. For example, a lawyer might
provide a copy of the decedent’s will or disclose information relating to the execution of a will to
a beneficiary or heir-at-law if the lawyer reasonably believes that disclosure of the information
would forestall litigation by the beneficiary or heir-at-law, thereby conserving assets of the estate
in the exercise of the lawyer’s professional discretion. However, information that the decedent
specifically required the lawyer not to disclose to others may not be disclosed by the lawyer to
the beneficiary or heir-at-law, regardless of whether the information is privileged. For example,
a deceased client may have specifically instructed the lawyer not to disclose information to
anyone about a child born out of wedlock or an extra-marital relationship.
Under Florida Statutes §90.502(3)(c), the personal representative may claim the privilege
on behalf of the decedent. It would be difficult for the personal representative to claim or waive
privilege on behalf of the decedent without knowing the content of the information which is
subject to the privilege. Therefore, a lawyer who represented the decedent in estate planning
matters may disclose information from the file to the personal representative, unless the decedent
specifically required that the information not be disclosed. Disclosure of such information is
impliedly authorized, to the extent the decedent did not specifically require that its
confidentiality be maintained, to carry out the decedent’s wishes involving the estate.

Page 4

On the other hand, a lawyer who represented the decedent on matters other than estate
planning would have no such implied authorization to disclose information to the personal
representative. For example, a lawyer who represented a client in a criminal defense matter
would not have implied authorization to disclose information to the personal representative, but
instead should decline to voluntarily provide information to the personal representative or other
third parties unless an exception to the confidentiality rule clearly applies.
Similarly, beneficiaries or heirs-at-law may attempt to compel the decedent’s lawyer to
provide information that the lawyer has determined within the lawyer’s professional discretion
not to provide voluntarily, because either disclosure would not serve the decedent’s interests or
the decedent has previously indicated that the information must not be disclosed. When under
compulsion of a subpoena, the lawyer acts ethically by complying with the subpoena as to any
information sought that is not privileged. However, the lawyer should raise the appropriate
privilege on behalf of the decedent regarding any information for which there is a good faith
basis to raise privilege and request that the court make a determination as to disclosure of the
information. As above, the lawyer should not make any disclosure of information which the
lawyer believes in good faith to be privileged until the court orders disclosure of the information.
If the court finds that the information is not privileged or that an exception to privilege applies,
the lawyer may either comply with the order by disclosing the information or “first exhaust all
appellate remedies.” See Rule 4-1.6(d) and Florida Ethics Opinions 65-7, 70-40, and 71-29.
Doubts about whether information should be voluntarily disclosed should be resolved in
favor of nondisclosure.