Ezel / Ethics Opinions / MTBAR

If a lawyer is a party in their own divorce, must they disclose client names, case details, and theories in discovery?

Short answer No. The opinion concluded that while public-record documents and knowledge must be produced on request, divulging client names, case details, advances, theories, injuries, and evidence would possibly violate the confidentiality rule, Rule 1.6.
Bar
MTBAR
Issued
February 3, 1988
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1988. Ask about yours and see what the current Montana Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether an attorney who is a party in a divorce action must divulge information about client names, the nature of cases, advances, theories of liability, injuries, and evidence as part of discovery. It answered no.

The committee drew a line between public and confidential information. Public-record documents and knowledge must be divulged on request. Divulging the categories listed in the question, however, would possibly violate the confidentiality protection of Rule 1.6, so the attorney-party is not required to produce that information in the divorce discovery.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988, before the State Bar of Montana's adoption of the 2004 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Must a lawyer-party produce client names and case details in their own divorce discovery?

A: No. The opinion concludes that divulging client names, case details, advances, theories, injuries, and evidence would possibly violate Rule 1.6 confidentiality.

Q: Is anything still discoverable?

A: Yes. The opinion states that public-record documents and knowledge must be divulged upon request.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Montana Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6 (Confidentiality of Information; Model Rule 1.6) in the context of civil discovery directed at a lawyer who is a party.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Mont. R. Prof. Cond. 1.6 (confidentiality of information) / Model Rule 1.6

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

Ethics Opinion
QUESTION PRESENTED: Must an attorney who is a party in a divorce action divulge information regarding client names, nature of cases, advances, theories of liability, injuries and evidence, etc. as part of discovery?

ANSWER: No.

ANALYSIS: Public record documents and knowledge must be divulged upon request, but divulging the above would possibly violate the confidentiality Rule 1.6.

THIS OPINION IS ADVISORY ONLY

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1988. Ezel checks the current Montana Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace