Ezel / Ethics Opinions / OSB
OSB April 2014

Can a retired Oregon lawyer donate old client files to an archive, or share a former client's confidences with that client's new lawyer?

Short answer: No to both, qualified. Absent the affected client's informed consent or another RPC 1.6 exception, a retired lawyer may not give files containing confidential information to an educational institution or disclose a former client's confidences to a new lawyer.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2014. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2014
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
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 Not binding precedent.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

A retired lawyer wants to give some of the lawyer's files to an educational institution for historical purposes; the files contain confidential information obtained from clients over the years. Separately, after the lawyer retires, the new lawyer for one of the lawyer's former clients asks the retired lawyer for information about the prior representation. The opinion asks whether the lawyer may give the files to the institution and whether the lawyer may convey client confidences or secrets to the new lawyer.

The opinion concludes no to both, qualified. It applies Oregon RPC 1.6(a), which bars a lawyer from revealing information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized to carry out the representation, or it is permitted by one of the exceptions in RPC 1.6(b). The opinion notes that retirement does not end the confidentiality duty and cites ORS 9.460(3), which requires a lawyer to maintain client confidences and secrets.

The opinion concludes that, absent informed consent from the affected clients or some other applicable exception, it would be improper for the lawyer either to turn the files over to an educational institution or to inform a new lawyer for the same client about prior confidences or secrets.

In practice

Under the Oregon rules as they stood at the time of the opinion, RPC 1.6 carried the confidentiality duty past the end of the representation and past the lawyer's retirement. The opinion holds that neither donating files containing client confidential information nor responding to a former client's new lawyer is permitted unless the affected client gives informed consent or another RPC 1.6(b) exception applies.

Common questions

Q: Can a retired lawyer donate old client files to a library or archive?

A: No, qualified. The opinion concludes that files containing client confidential information may not be turned over to an educational institution without the affected clients' informed consent or another RPC 1.6 exception.

Q: Can a former lawyer share a client's confidences with that client's new lawyer?

A: No, qualified. The opinion concludes the former lawyer may not convey the client's confidences or secrets to the new lawyer absent informed consent or another exception.

Q: Does the confidentiality duty end when a lawyer retires?

A: No. The opinion applies RPC 1.6 to a retired lawyer and cites ORS 9.460(3) requiring a lawyer to maintain client confidences and secrets.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Oregon RPC 1.6 (confidentiality of information relating to the representation), including the consent and implied-authorization gateway in 1.6(a) and the exceptions in 1.6(b), with the definition of protected information in RPC 1.0(f) and the statutory duty in ORS 9.460(3). RPC 1.6 tracks Model Rule 1.6.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Oregon RPC 1.6 / Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information)
  • Oregon RPC 1.0(f) (definition of information relating to the representation)

Statutes:

  • ORS 9.460(3) (duty to maintain client confidences and secrets)
  • OEC 503 (lawyer-client privilege)

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2014 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.