May a lawyer disclose that a purported accident passenger he also represented submitted a fraudulent insurance claim?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry again concerned the strong duty to guard a client's confidences and secrets under RPC 1.6 (formerly DR 4-101). The Committee noted that RPC 1.6(b) and (c) recognize limited situations in which a lawyer must, or is authorized to, reveal such information to the proper authorities, and stated that the facts of this inquiry fall within the exception under RPC 1.6(c) authorizing the inquirer to make the disclosure.

The facts: an attorney was separately retained by both the driver and a purported passenger of a vehicle involved in an accident to recover for injuries. In the course of that representation he forwarded the medical bills of both to the driver's PIP insurance carrier and completed PIP applications for both, and the driver's carrier paid roughly $4,000 on account of the passenger's injuries.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986, before New Jersey'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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer reveal a client's insurance fraud?

A: Per the opinion, yes, in these circumstances. The Committee held that the facts fall within the RPC 1.6(c) exception authorizing the inquirer to disclose.

Q: What facts triggered the exception?

A: The opinion describes the lawyer representing both a driver and a purported passenger and processing PIP claims that led the driver's carrier to pay about $4,000 on the passenger's injuries.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies RPC 1.6 (formerly DR 4-101), the confidentiality rule, and in particular the disclosure exception in RPC 1.6(c), to a situation in which the lawyer's services were connected to a fraudulent insurance claim.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.6 / NJ RPC 1.6(c) (authorized disclosure of confidential information)

See also

• NJ ACPE Op. 586: Disclosing a Concealed Fraud to a Former Client
• NJ ACPE Op. 595: Threatening Criminal Charges in a Collection Letter

Source

• Full text (Justia mirror): https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/advisory-committee-on-professional-ethics/2004/acp585-1.html
• Issuing authority: New Jersey Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, via the NJ Courts Supreme Court Committees page

Original opinion text

Reproduced from a full-text mirror of the official opinion for research purposes. The linked official source controls.

117 N.J.L.J. 438, April 3, 1986

OPINION 585

Attorney-Client Confidentiality - Disclosure of Insurance Fraud

This inquiry once again seeks an opinion relating to the powerful policy requiring an attorney scrupulously to guard the confidences and secrets of his client as presently set forth in RPC 1.6 (formerly DR 4-101).

RPC 1.6(b) and (c) recognize, as did our prior opinions, that there are limited situations which, under subsection (b), require a lawyer to reveal such information and other situations in which, under subsection (c), the lawyer is authorized to reveal such information to the proper authorities.

The facts of the instant inquiry fall within the exception to the general rule authorizing the inquirer to make the disclosure. [RPC 1.6(c)].

In this inquiry, an attorney was separately retained by both the Driver and a purported Passenger of a motor vehicle involved in an accident - to recover damages for injuries sustained therein. During the course of such representation, the attorney processed payments of medical bills of both driver and passenger by forwarding these bills to Driver's PIP insurance carrier. He also completed PIP applications for both Driver and Passenger. Driver's carrier, as a consequence, paid roughly $4,000 on account of passenger's injuries.