My client's opposing guardian violated a Family Court order not to leave Rhode Island with the child. As an officer of the court, must I report the violation, or does Rule 1.6 protect what I learned?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney represented the father of a minor child who was under the guardianship of another. The Family Court had ordered the guardian not to leave Rhode Island with the child pending a final custody determination. The attorney learned that the guardian did leave the state with the child for three or four days, and asked whether, as an officer of the court, the attorney had to report the violation.

The Panel answered no. It explained that information learned by a lawyer during the representation of a client is presumed confidential under Rule 1.6(a), subject to exceptions under Rule 1.6(b) that may allow or require disclosure, and that some disclosures adverse to a client are permitted because of other obligations under the rules and substantive law, citing Rules 3.3 and 4.1. Here, the information the attorney received from the client about the violation of the Family Court order was protected under Rule 1.6 unless false evidence was offered to the court, which would make disclosure necessary under Rule 3.3(a)(2). The Panel quoted Rule 3.3(a)(2): "A lawyer shall not knowingly ... fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client."

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996 (Opinion 96-06, issued April 10, 1996), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 1.6, 3.3, and 4.1 as they stood at the time. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which amended the confidentiality and candor provisions. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Must a lawyer report an opposing party's violation of a court order?

A: On these facts the Panel said no. It treated the information about the guardian's violation as protected by Rule 1.6, so the attorney had no duty to report it.

Q: Does being an officer of the court override confidentiality here?

A: The Panel did not treat the officer-of-the-court role as creating a reporting duty. It grounded the analysis in Rule 1.6's protection, subject only to the specific exceptions in the rules.

Q: When would the lawyer have to disclose?

A: The Panel identified Rule 3.3(a)(2): if false evidence were offered to the court, disclosure could become necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct 1.6 (confidentiality of information), 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal), and 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others), the analogs of Model Rules 1.6, 3.3, and 4.1. The Panel treated Rule 1.6 as the default, with the candor duty of Rule 3.3(a)(2) as the limited circumstance that could compel disclosure.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.6 / RI RPC 1.6 (confidentiality of information)
• MR 3.3 / RI RPC 3.3(a)(2) (candor toward the tribunal; disclosure to avoid assisting a fraudulent act)
• MR 4.1 / RI RPC 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 94-78: confidentiality bars reporting an executor's suspected diversion under Rules 1.6 and 8.3
• RI EAP Opinion 92-23: a guardianship attorney must act on the guardian's fraud against the ward

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2096-06.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION 96-06, - REQUEST # 654
ISSUED - APRIL 10, 1996

FACTS:

The inquiring attorney represents the father of a minor child who is under guardianship of another. The Family Court ordered the guardian not leave the State of Rhode Island with the minor child pending a final determination on custody. The attorney has learned that the guardian did indeed leave the state with the child for three or four days.

ISSUE(S) PRESENTED:

Must the attorney, as an officer of the court, report the violation?

OPINION:

No.

REASONING:

Information learned by a lawyer during the representation of a client is presumed to be confidential. Rule 1.6(a). There are exceptions to the rule which may allow or require disclosure. Rule 1.6(b). Because of other obligations placed upon lawyers by the rules and by substantive law, some disclosures that may be adverse to a client are permitted. See: Rules 3.3 and 4.1.

In this case, the information received by the attorney from the client concerning the violation of the Family Court Order is protected under Rule 1.6 unless false evidence is offered to the court, which would make disclosure necessary under Rule 3.3(a)(2), which states: "A lawyer shall not knowingly: . . . (2) fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client."