What must the other lawyers in a firm do when a partner or colleague becomes mentally impaired and may be harming clients?

Plain-English summary

The opinion, which follows the approach of ABA Formal Opinion 03-429, addresses what lawyers in a firm must do when another firm lawyer suffers a mental condition that impairs the ability to practice or causes a rule violation. The premise is that impairment does not lessen the duties owed to clients: an impaired lawyer can violate Rule 1.1 (competence), Rule 1.3 (diligence), and Rule 1.4 (communication), and Rule 1.16(a)(2) requires withdrawal where the lawyer's condition materially impairs the ability to represent a client. On Inquiry #1, the opinion holds that under Rule 5.1(a) and (b) the firm's managerial and supervisory lawyers must make reasonable efforts to ensure the impaired lawyer conforms to the Rules, which means closely supervising the lawyer's work; appropriate steps include confronting the lawyer, urging acceptance of assistance, accommodating the impairment by changing the work or environment, limiting the lawyer's matters, and making a confidential report to the State Bar's Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP).

On Inquiry #2, where the impaired lawyer has converted client funds and missed discovery, the opinion finds violations of Rules 1.15, 1.1, and 1.3 that may have to be reported and whose consequences the firm must mitigate, including replacing client funds. Rule 8.3(a) requires reporting misconduct that raises a substantial question about the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness. Citing RPC 243, an isolated lapse, or misconduct the firm can prevent from recurring through close supervision, may not require a report, but serious misconduct like the trust-account violation must be reported. A report may not disclose confidential client information without consent under Rule 8.3(c) and Rule 1.6, and Rule 1.4(b) requires explaining the situation to a client who must decide whether to stay with the firm; Rule 5.1(c) requires remedial action to avoid the consequences of the violation. On Inquiry #3, the opinion holds that reporting to LAP does not satisfy the Rule 8.3(a) duty to report to the State Bar; following 2003 FEO 2, the disciplinary program and LAP are not mutually exclusive, because discipline addresses conduct while LAP addresses the underlying illness.

On the remaining inquiries, the opinion addresses the impaired lawyer's departure and the duties of associates and the bar. If the lawyer leaves to start a solo practice (Inquiry #4), the remaining lawyers may have to give current clients enough information to make an informed decision about following him, with no comparable duty to former clients so long as the firm does not appear to endorse him. A partner or supervising lawyer who receives a report of impairment, from an associate or staff member, must investigate and act, and may never cover it up (Inquiry #5); an associate who observes impairment must report it up the chain (Inquiry #6). Under Rule 5.2(a) a subordinate lawyer remains bound by the Rules despite a supervisor's direction, and where a supervisor refuses to act the associate should raise the Rule 8.3 concern and seek guidance from the State Bar's ethics advice lawyers (Inquiries #7 and #8). The Rules impose no special duty on other lawyers in the community beyond the Rule 8.3 reporting duty, though they are encouraged to help the impaired lawyer find treatment or transition out of practice (Inquiry #9). Inquiry #10 confirms the answers do not change if the impairment stems from substance abuse or mental illness rather than age.

In practice

Under the North Carolina rules as they stood at the time of the opinion, conduct in which a firm ignores a colleague's impairment or leaves it unsupervised is not permitted; the opinion holds that Rule 5.1 obliges managers and supervisors to make reasonable efforts to prevent rule violations by the impaired lawyer and to take remedial action when violations occur. Per the opinion, the analysis turns on the severity and recurrence risk of the impairment: close supervision, accommodation, or removal from matters may suffice, but serious misconduct triggers the Rule 8.3 duty to report to the State Bar.

The opinion sets several firm boundaries. A confidential LAP report does not satisfy the Rule 8.3 duty to report serious misconduct. A report may not reveal confidential client information without consent under Rules 8.3(c) and 1.6. Clients must be given the information Rule 1.4(b) requires to decide whether to change counsel, and the firm must mitigate harm from the impaired lawyer's past work, including replacing converted funds. An associate is bound by the Rules under Rule 5.2(a) even when a supervisor tells him to stay quiet.

Common questions

Q: What must a firm do when it suspects a partner is becoming mentally impaired?

A: Opinion #1 says the firm's managerial and supervisory lawyers must make reasonable efforts under Rule 5.1 to ensure the lawyer conforms to the Rules, which means closely supervising the work and taking steps such as confronting the lawyer, urging assistance, accommodating the impairment, limiting matters, or reporting confidentially to the Lawyer Assistance Program.

Q: Does the firm have to report the impaired lawyer to the State Bar?

A: Only for serious misconduct. Opinion #2 says Rule 8.3(a) requires reporting misconduct that raises a substantial question about honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness, such as the trust-account conversion described; an isolated lapse, or misconduct the firm can prevent from recurring through supervision, may not require a report.

Q: Can the firm satisfy the reporting duty by reporting to the Lawyer Assistance Program?

A: No. Opinion #3 says a LAP report does not satisfy Rule 8.3(a); following 2003 FEO 2, a report to the State Bar is required, though a confidential LAP report is also appropriate because discipline and LAP serve different purposes.

Q: What does the firm owe clients when an impaired lawyer is removed or leaves?

A: Opinion #2 and Opinion #4 say Rule 1.4(b) requires explaining the situation so the client can decide whether to stay with the firm or follow the departing lawyer, and Rule 5.1(c) requires the firm to mitigate the consequences of the impaired lawyer's prior work.

Q: What should an associate do if a supervisor tells them to ignore a partner's impairment?

A: Opinion #7 says that under Rule 5.2(a) the associate remains bound by the Rules; if the duty to report under Rule 8.3 may be triggered, the associate should raise it with the supervisor and, if the supervisor declines to act, seek guidance from the State Bar's ethics advice lawyers.

Q: Does it matter whether the impairment is from age, substance abuse, or mental illness?

A: No. Opinion #10 says the answers do not change based on the cause of the impairment.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies North Carolina Rule 5.1 (responsibilities of partners, managers, and supervisory lawyers, the analogue of Model Rule 5.1), Rule 5.2 (responsibilities of a subordinate lawyer, the analogue of Model Rule 5.2), and Rule 8.3 (reporting professional misconduct, the analogue of Model Rule 8.3), reading them together to require supervision of an impaired lawyer and reporting of serious resulting misconduct. It applies Rule 1.16(a)(2) (declining or terminating representation where the lawyer's condition materially impairs the representation) and the underlying duties of Rules 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4.

The reporting analysis is bounded by Rule 1.6 (confidentiality) and Rule 8.3(c), which bar a report that would reveal confidential client information without consent. The opinion relies on ABA Formal Opinion 03-429, RPC 243, and 2003 FEO 2, and notes Rule 1.5(a) limits charging a client for extra supervision and Rules 7.1 and 8.4(c) constrain what a firm may say about a departed lawyer.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 5.1 / NC Rule 5.1 (partners, managers, and supervisory lawyers; Rule 5.1(a), (b), (c))
• MR 5.2 / NC Rule 5.2(a) (subordinate lawyer bound by the Rules)
• MR 8.3 / NC Rule 8.3 (reporting misconduct; Rule 8.3(a), 8.3(c))
• MR 1.16 / NC Rule 1.16(a)(2) (withdrawal where condition materially impairs representation)
• MR 1.6 / NC Rule 1.6 (confidentiality)
• NC Rules 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(b) (communication), 1.15 (safekeeping property), 1.5(a) (fees)

Other opinions cited:

• ABA Formal Op. 03-429 (2003): obligations regarding a mentally impaired lawyer in the firm.
• NC RPC 243: an isolated lapse of judgment does not raise a substantial question about fitness.
• NC 2003 FEO 2: a report to LAP does not satisfy the duty to report misconduct to the State Bar.

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 03-429: Mentally Impaired Lawyer in the Firm
• CA Bar Op. 2021-206: A Colleague's Mental Impairment
• ABA Formal Op. 04-433: Reporting Misconduct of a Non-Practicing Lawyer

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ncbar.gov/for-lawyers/ethics-and-governing-rules/ethics-opinions/opinions/2013-formal-ethics-opinion-8/

Original opinion text

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

Introduction:

As the lawyers from the “Baby Boomer” generation advance in years, there will be more instances of lawyers who suffer from mental impairment or diminished capacity due to age. In addition, lawyers suffer from depression and substance abuse at approximately twice the rate of the general population.1This opinion examines the obligations of lawyers in a firm who learn that another firm lawyer suffers from a mental condition that impairs the lawyer’s ability to practice law or has resulted in a violation of a Rule of Professional Conduct. This opinion relies upon ABA Commission on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Formal Opinion 03-429 (2003) [hereinafter ABA Formal Op. 03-429] for its approach to the issues raised by the mental impairment of a lawyer in a firm. For further guidance, readers are encouraged to refer to the ABA opinion.

Inquiry #1:

Attorney X has been practicing law successfully for over 40 years and is a prominent lawyer in his community. In recent years, his ability to remember has diminished and he has become confused on occasion. The other lawyers in his firm are concerned that he may be suffering from the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease or dementia.

What are the professional responsibilities2of the other lawyers in the firm?3

Opinion #1:

The partners4in the firm must make reasonable efforts to ensure that Attorney X does not violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Mental impairment may lead to inability to competently represent a client as required by Rule 1.1, inability to complete tasks in a diligent manner as required by Rule 1.3, and inability to communicate with clients about their representation as required by Rule 1.4. Although a consequence of the lawyer’s impairment, these are violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct nonetheless. As noted in ABA Formal Op. 03-429, “[i]mpaired lawyers have the same obligations under the [Rules of Professional Conduct] as other lawyers. Simply stated, mental impairment does not lessen a lawyer’s obligation to provide clients with competent representation.” Under Rule 1.16(a)(2), a lawyer is prohibited from representing a client and, where representation has commenced, required to withdraw if “the lawyer's physical or mental condition materially impairs the lawyer's ability to represent the client.” Unfortunately, an impaired lawyer may not be aware or may deny that his impairment is negatively impacting his ability to represent clients. ABA Formal Op. 03-429.

Rule 5.1(a) requires partners in a firm and all lawyers with comparable managerial authority in the firm to “make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm or the organization has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm or the organization conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct.” Similarly, Rule 5.1(b) requires a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over another lawyer to “make reasonable efforts to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to the Rules of Professional Conduct.” Taken together, these provisions require a managerial or supervisory lawyer who suspects or knows that a lawyer is impaired to closely supervise5the conduct of the impaired lawyer because of the risk that the impairment will result in violations of the Rules.

When deciding what should be done in response to a lawyer’s apparent mental impairment, it may be helpful to partners and supervising lawyers to consult a mental health professional for advice about identifying mental impairment and assistance for the impaired lawyer. Id. As observed in ABA Formal Op. 03-429,

[t]he firm’s paramount obligation is to take steps to protect the interest of its clients. The first step may be to confront the impaired lawyer with the facts of his impairment and insist upon steps to assure that clients are represented appropriately notwithstanding the lawyer’s impairment. Other steps include forcefully urging the impaired lawyer to accept assistance to prevent future violations or limiting the ability of the impaired lawyer to handle legal matters or deal with clients.

Id. If the lawyer’s mental impairment can be accommodated by changing the lawyer’s work environment or the type of work that the lawyer performs, such steps also should be taken.6 “Depending on the nature, severity, and permanence (or likelihood of periodic recurrence) of the lawyer’s impairment, management of the firm has an obligation to supervise the legal services performed by the lawyer and, in an appropriate case, prevent the lawyer from rendering legal services to clients of the firm.” Id. Making a confidential report to the State Bar’s Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP) (or to another lawyers assistance program approved by the State Bar7) would also be an appropriate step. The LAP can provide the impaired lawyer with confidential advice, referrals, and other assistance.

Inquiry #2:

Attorney X’s mental capacity continues to diminish. Apparently as a consequence of mental impairment, Attorney X failed to deliver client funds to the office manager for deposit in the trust account. It is believed that he converted the funds to his own use. In addition, Attorney X failed to complete discovery for a number of clients although he declined assistance from the other lawyers in the firm. Some clients may face court sanctions as a consequence. Although Attorney X is engaging and articulate when he meets with clients, he no longer seems able to prepare for litigation and, on more than one occasion, Attorney X’s presentation in court was muddled, meandering, and confused.

What are the professional responsibilities of the other lawyers in the firm?

Opinion #2:

Attorney X has violated Rule 1.15 by failing to place entrusted funds in the firm trust account. He has also violated Rule 1.1 and Rule 1.3 by providing incompetent representation and by failing to act with reasonable promptness in completing discovery. These are violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct that may have to be reported to the State Bar or to the court. In addition, steps may have to be taken to provide additional ongoing supervision for Attorney X or to change the circumstances or type of work that he performs to avoid additional violations of his professional duties. The other lawyers in the firm must also take steps to mitigate the adverse consequences of Attorney X’s past conduct including replacing client funds.

Rule 8.3(a) requires a lawyer "who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects [to] inform the North Carolina State Bar or the court having jurisdiction over the matter." Only misconduct that raises a “substantial question” as to the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness must be reported. As noted in the Comment,

[t]his Rule limits the reporting obligation to those offenses that a self-regulating profession must vigorously endeavor to prevent. A measure of judgment is, therefore, required in complying with the provisions of this Rule. The term "substantial" refers to the seriousness of the possible offense and not the quantum of evidence of which the lawyer is aware.

Rule 8.3, cmt. [4].

If an impaired lawyer’s misconduct is isolated and unlikely to recur because the mental impairment has ended or is controlled by medication or treatment, no report of incompetent or delinquent representation may be required. See RPC 243 (an “isolated incident resulting from a momentary lapse of judgment” does not raise a substantial question about honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness). “Similarly, if the firm is able to eliminate the risk of future violations of the duties of competence and diligence under the [Rules] through close supervision of the lawyer’s work, it would not be required to report the impaired lawyer’s violation.” ABA Formal Op. 03-429.

However, reporting is required if the misconduct is serious, such as the violation of the trust accounting rules described in this inquiry, or the lawyer insists upon continuing to practice although his mental impairment has rendered him unable to represent clients as required by the Rules of Professional Conduct.8In either situation, a report of misconduct may not be made if it would require the disclosure of confidential client information in violation of Rule 1.6, and the client does not consent to disclosure. See Rule 8.3(c).

Rule 1.4(b) requires a lawyer to “explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.” If the managing lawyers determine that the impaired lawyer cannot provide competent and diligent representation and should be removed from a client’s case, the situation must be explained to the client so that the client can decide whether to agree to be represented by another lawyer in the firm or to seek other legal counsel.

Rule 5.1(c) requires a partner or a lawyer with comparable managerial authority or with supervisory authority over another lawyer to take reasonable remedial action to avoid the consequences of the lawyer’s violation of the Rules. Even if the impaired lawyer is removed from a representation, the firm lawyers must make every effort to mitigate any adverse consequences of the impaired lawyer’s prior representation of the client.

Inquiry #3:

If the firm partners determine that Attorney X has violated the Rules and there is a duty to report under Rule 8.3, may they fulfill the duty by reporting Attorney X to the State Bar’s Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP)?

Opinion #3:

No. 2003 Formal Ethics Opinion 2 addressed this issue in the context of reporting opposing counsel as follows:

The report of misconduct should be made to the Grievance Committee of the State Bar if a lawyer's impairment results in a violation of the Rules that is sufficient to trigger the reporting requirement. The lawyer must be held professionally accountable. See, e.g., Rule .0130(e) of the Rules on Discipline and Disability of Attorneys, 27 N.C.A.C. 1B, Section .0100 (information regarding a member's alleged drug use will be referred to LAP; information regarding the member's alleged additional misconduct will be reported to the chair of the Grievance Committee).

Making a report to the State Bar, as required under Rule 8.3(a), does not diminish the appropriateness of also making a confidential report to LAP. The Bar's disciplinary program and LAP often deal with the same lawyer and are not mutually exclusive. The discipline program addresses conduct; LAP addresses the underlying illness that may have caused the conduct. Both programs, in the long run, protect the public interest.

Inquiry #4:

Attorney X announces his intent to leave the firm to set up his own solo practice and to take all of his client files with him. The other lawyers in the firm are concerned that, absent any supervision or assistance, Attorney X will be unable to competently represent clients because of his mental impairment.

What are the duties of the remaining lawyers in the firm if Attorney X leaves and sets up his own practice?

Opinion #4:

In addition to any duty to report, the remaining lawyers may have a duty to any current client of Attorney X to ensure that the client has sufficient information to make an informed decision about continuing to be represented by Attorney X.

As noted in Opinion #2, Rule 1.4(b) requires a lawyer to “explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.” The clients of an impaired lawyer who leaves a firm must decide whether to follow the departed lawyer to his new law practice. To make an informed decision, the clients must be informed of “the facts surrounding the withdrawal to the extent disclosure is reasonably necessary for those clients to make an informed decision about the selection of counsel.” ABA Formal Op. 03-429.9There is no comparable duty to former clients of the impaired lawyer as long as the firm avoids any action that might be interpreted as an endorsement of the services of the departed, impaired lawyer, including sending a joint letter regarding the lawyer’s departure from the firm.

The remaining lawyers in the firm may conclude that, while under their supervision and support, the impaired lawyer did not violate the Rules and, therefore, there is no duty to report to the State Bar under Rule 8.3. Nevertheless, subject to the duty of confidentiality to clients under Rule 1.6, voluntarily reporting the impaired lawyer to LAP (or another lawyer assistance program approved by the State Bar) would be appropriate. The impaired lawyer will receive assistance and support from LAP and this may help to prevent harm to the interests of the impaired lawyer’s clients.

Inquiry #5:

Associate lawyers and staff members are often the first to observe behavior indicating that a lawyer has a mental impairment. If an associate lawyer or a staff member reports behavior by Attorney X that indicates that Attorney X is impaired and may be unable to represent clients competently and diligently, what is a partner’s or supervising lawyer’s duty upon receiving such a report?

Opinion #5:

If a partner or supervising lawyer receives a report of impairment from an associate lawyer or a staff member, regardless of whether the lawyer suspected of impairment is a senior partner or an associate, the partner or supervising lawyer must investigate and, if it appears that the report is meritorious, take appropriate measures to ensure that the impaired lawyer’s conduct conforms to the Rules of Professional Conduct. See Opinion #1 and Rule 5.1(a). It is never appropriate to protect the impaired lawyer by refusing to act upon or ignoring a report of impairment or by attempting to cover up the lawyer’s impairment.

Inquiry #6:

If an associate lawyer in the firm observes behavior by Attorney X that indicates that Attorney X is not competent to represent clients, what should the associate lawyer do?

Opinion #6:

The associate lawyer must report his or her observations to a supervising lawyer or the senior management of the firm as necessary to bring the situation to the attention of lawyers in the firm who can take action.

Inquiry #7:

An associate lawyer in the firm reports to his supervising lawyer that he suspects that Attorney X is mentally impaired. He also describes to the supervising lawyer conduct by Attorney X that violated Rules 1.1 and 1.3. The supervising lawyer tells the associate to ignore the situation and to not say anything to anyone about his observations including clients, other lawyers in the firm, or staff members. The associate concludes that no action will be taken to investigate or address Attorney X’s behavior. Does the associate lawyer have any further obligation?

Opinion #7:

A subordinate lawyer is bound by the Rules of Professional Conduct notwithstanding that the subordinate lawyer acts at the direction of another lawyer in the firm. Rule 5.2(a). If the associate lawyer believes that the duty to report professional misconduct under Rule 8.3 may be triggered by the conduct of Attorney X, the associate lawyer should discuss this concern with his supervising lawyer. If the supervising lawyer declines to address the situation, the associate lawyer should seek guidance as to his professional responsibilities from the lawyers at the State Bar who provide informal ethics advice.

Inquiry #8:

Assume that Attorney X is the sole principal in the firm and there is one associate lawyer. Attorney X displays behavior that may indicate that he is in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease or dementia. There is no senior management to whom the associate lawyer can report. What should the associate lawyer do?

Opinion #8:

If the associate lawyer believes that the duty to report professional misconduct under Rule 8.3 may be triggered by the conduct of Attorney X, the associate lawyer should seek guidance as to his professional responsibilities from the lawyers at the State Bar who provide informal ethics advice. See Opinion #7. Regardless of whether Attorney X’s conduct triggers the duty to report, the associate lawyer may seek advice and assistance from the LAP or from another approved lawyer assistance program, or may contact a trusted, more experienced lawyer in another firm to serve as a mentor or advisor on how to address the situation.

Inquiry #9:

Assume Attorney X is a sole practitioner and the lawyers in his community observe behavior that may indicate that he is in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease or dementia. What is the responsibility of the lawyers in the community?

Opinion #9:

The Rules of Professional Conduct impose no specific duty on other members of the bar to take action relative to a potentially impaired fellow lawyer except the duty to report to the State Bar if the other lawyer’s conduct raises a substantial question about his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness to practice law and the information about the lawyer is not confidential client information. See Opinion #7. Nevertheless, as a matter of professional responsibility, attendant to the duties to seek to improve the legal profession and to protect the interests of the public that are articulated in the Preamble to the Rules of Professional Conduct, the lawyers in the community are encouraged to assist the potentially impaired lawyer to find treatment or to transition from the practice of law. A mental health professional, the LAP, or another lawyer assistance program can be consulted for advice and assistance.

Inquiry #10:

Do the responses to any of the inquiries above change if the lawyer’s impairment is due to some other reason such as substance abuse or mental illness?

Opinion #10:

No.

End Notes

• ABA Comm. on Ethics and Prof’l Responsibility, Formal Op. 03-429 (2003) (citing George Edward Bailly, Impairment, the Profession, and Your Law Partner, 11 No.1 Prof. Law. 2 (1999)) [hereinafter ABA Formal Op. 03-429].

• This opinion does not address the issues that may arise under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 US C. §§12101 et seq. (2003) (the ADA) relative to an employer’s legal responsibilities to an impaired lawyer. Lawyers are advised to consult the ADA and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s website, eeoc.gov, for guidance.

• “Firm” as used in the Rules of Professional Conduct and this opinion denotes “a lawyer or lawyers in a law partnership, professional corporation, sole proprietorship, or other association authorized to practice law; or lawyers employed in a legal services organization or the legal department of a corporation, government entity, or other organization.” Rule 1.0(d).

• “Partner” as used in the Rules of Professional Conduct and this opinion denotes “a member of a partnership, a shareholder in a law firm organized as a professional corporation, or a member of an association authorized to practice law.” Rule 1.0(h).

• It is improper for a firm to charge a client for additional supervision for an impaired lawyer if the supervision exceeds what is normally required to ensure competent representation unless the client is advised of the reason for the additional supervision and agrees to the charges. See Rule 1.5(a).

• ABA Formal Op. 03-429 provides the following examples of accommodation: A lawyer who, because of his mental impairment, is unable to perform tasks under strict deadlines or other pressures, might be able to function in compliance with the [Rules] if he can work in an unpressured environment. In addition, the type of work involved, as opposed to the circumstances under which the work occurs, might need to be examined when considering the effect that an impairment might have on a lawyer’s performance. For example, an impairment may make it impossible for a lawyer to handle a jury trial or hostile takeover competently, but not interfere at all with his performing legal research or drafting transaction documents.

• One such program is the Transitioning Lawyers Commission (or “TLC”) of the North Carolina Bar Association, which considers issues of aging and cognitive impairment and helps lawyers to wind down their law practices to “retire gracefully.” See more at: tlc.ncbar.org.

• ABA Formal Op. 03-429 cautions that when reporting an impaired lawyer pursuant to Rule 8.3, disclosure of the impairment may be necessary; however, the reporting lawyer should be careful to avoid violating the ADA.

• ABA Formal Op. 03-429 counsels that, when providing a client with information about the departed lawyer, a firm lawyer “must be careful to limit any statement to ones for which there is a reasonable factual foundation.” This will avoid violating the prohibition on false and misleading communications in Rule 7.1 and the prohibition on deceit and misrepresentation in Rule 8.4(c).