May a Missouri lawyer obey a court order requiring client information when the client refuses consent?

Plain-English summary

Rule 4-1.6(b)(4) permits disclosure reasonably necessary for a court order, while Rule 4-3.4(c) bars knowing disobedience absent an open, good-faith refusal.

Without client consent, the lawyer first asserts all nonfrivolous lack-of-authority, privilege, and other-law objections. After denial, the lawyer consults the current client about appeal. If review is not sought, the client is no longer current, or no good-faith basis exists, compliance is allowed and may be mandatory.

In practice

Under this opinion, compelled disclosure follows exhaustion of grounded protection arguments and client consultation, and remains limited to what the order reasonably requires.

Common questions

Q: Must nonfrivolous objections be asserted? A: Yes.

Q: Must appeal be discussed? A: With a current client, to the Rule 4-1.4 extent.

Q: When may the lawyer comply? A: After review is declined or unavailable, or when no good-faith challenge exists.

Background and rules framework

Rules 4-1.6(b)(4), 4-3.4(c), and 4-1.4 govern disclosure, tribunal obligations, and consultation.

Citations and references

• Missouri Rules 4-1.4, 4-1.6(b)(4), and 4-3.4(c); Rule 4-1.6 Comment [11]

See also

• Missouri Informal Op. 2026-11: Subpoenaed Lawyer

Source

• Landing page: Missouri Informal Opinion 2017-04

Original opinion text

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

Question: May Attorney comply with a court Order directing Attorney to provide to law enforcement information related to the representation of Client, where Client declines to give informed consent for Attorney to provide the confidential information?

Answer: Rule 4–1.6(b)(4) allows Attorney to reveal confidential information to the extent reasonably necessary to comply with other law or a court order. Rule 4–3.4(c) forbids a lawyer from knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal, except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no obligation exists. Before complying with the Order, and absent informed consent from Client to do otherwise, attorney should assert on Client’s behalf all nonfrivolous claims that the Order is not authorized by other law or that the information is protected by the attorney-client privilege or other applicable law. See Rule 4–1.6, Comment [11]. If Attorney’s challenge is denied, Attorney must consult with Client about the possibility of appeal, to the extent required by Rule 4–1.4. See Rule 4–1.6, Comment [11]. If review is not sought, or if Client is no longer Attorney’s current client at the time of the adverse ruling, Attorney is free to comply with the Order. Rule 4–1.6(b)(4). If Attorney lacks a good faith basis for an original or further challenge to the Order, Attorney is free to comply with the Order and may be required to do so pursuant to Rule 4–3.4(c).