Is it an ethics violation for a lawyer to routinely ignore phone calls and letters from other attorneys?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether a lawyer who regularly fails to respond to telephone calls and correspondence from other attorneys, as a course of conduct, acts improperly. It concluded that the consistent failure to respond violates the Code, citing EC 7-10, EC 7-37, EC 7-38, and EC 7-39, and N.Y. State 396 (1975) for the duty to return calls and inquiries from fellow members of the Bar as well as from clients.

The committee tied the duty to the functioning of the adversary system. EC 7-10 obligates a lawyer, concurrently with the duty to represent the client, to treat all persons in the legal process with consideration and courtesy, which the committee read to include returning calls from other lawyers, provided the calls are not made in an overburdening number. EC 7-37 and EC 7-38 require courtesy and respect toward opposing counsel and consideration of reasonable requests for adjournments, stipulations, and information that aid the administration of justice without prejudicing the client. The committee noted a lawyer should follow local customs of courtesy unless he informs opposing counsel he will not.

EC 7-39, the committee observed, makes the proper functioning of the adversary system depend on consideration between lawyers and tribunals, using procedures that keep decisional processes prompt and just without impinging on zealous representation within the law.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1975, before New York replaced the Code of Professional Responsibility with the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2009. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Does a lawyer have an ethical duty to return another lawyer's phone calls?

A: Under this opinion, yes. The committee held that a lawyer is obligated to return calls and inquiries from fellow members of the Bar, citing EC 7-10 and N.Y. State 396 (1975), provided the calls are not made in an overburdening number.

Q: Is a single missed call a violation?

A: The opinion framed the violation as a course of conduct, the consistent or regular failure to respond, rather than an isolated instance.

Q: What did the committee tie the duty to?

A: Per the opinion, the duty flows from the lawyer's obligation of courtesy in the adversary process under EC 7-10, 7-37, 7-38, and 7-39, including consideration of reasonable requests for adjournments, stipulations, and information.

Background and rules framework

The opinion rests on the then-current New York Code's Ethical Considerations governing courtesy and cooperation in the adversary system, EC 7-10, 7-37, 7-38, and 7-39. These are aspirational considerations rather than disciplinary rules, and they do not map onto a single black-letter Model Rule; the duty of courtesy toward other lawyers now lives largely in the Rules' preamble and in local professionalism standards.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• NY EC 7-10, EC 7-37, EC 7-38, EC 7-39 (courtesy and cooperation in the adversary process)

Other opinions cited:

• N.Y. State 396 (1975): duty to return calls and inquiries from fellow members of the Bar and from clients

See also

• NY State Bar Op. 413: A prosecutor's outside business with defense counsel
• NY State Bar Op. 420: A prosecutor's public statements and ex parte sentencing letters

Source

• Landing page: https://nysba.org/opinion-407/