Ezel / Ethics Opinions / VTBAR

Must a Vermont lawyer report another attorney's suspected misconduct if the information is a former client's confidence or secret?

Short answer Opinion 92-10 holds that the then-current reporting duty did not require disclosure of a client's protected confidence or secret without consent after full disclosure.
Bar
VTBAR
Issued
1992
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1992. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

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 Not binding precedent.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 lawyer formerly representing a wife in divorce proceedings asked whether to report her lawyer-husband's direct contacts with her. The lawyer feared professional sanctions against the husband could harm the wife's financial interests. The committee assumed possible misconduct for its analysis but expressly did not decide the other lawyer's conduct.

Former DR 1-103 required reporting unprivileged knowledge of Code violations. The committee read “unprivileged” to exclude both legal confidences and DR 4-101 secrets whose disclosure would harm the client. It found no reporting obligation without the former client's consent after full disclosure and suggested discussing disclosure and its potential effects with her.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 under Vermont's former Code of Professional Responsibility. The Vermont Supreme Court's rules history states that the Rules of Professional Conduct applied to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999. Later amendments or opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this opinion as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Did “unprivileged” exclude only evidence-law privilege?

A: No. The committee adopted the broader reading that also excluded client secrets protected by DR 4-101.

Q: Could the lawyer report with the former client's consent?

A: Yes. The opinion said consent after full disclosure would permit reporting to the tribunal or Professional Conduct Board.

Background and rules framework

The opinion reconciled former DR 1-103's reporting duty with DR 4-101's protection of client information. It assumed possible DR 7-104 and DR 1-102 issues solely to answer the requesting lawyer's question.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Vermont Code of Professional Responsibility DR 1-103, DR 4-101, DR 7-104, and DR 1-102

Other opinions cited:

  • Vermont Opinions 90-9, 91-13, and 86-4, reporting interpretation and limits on judging another lawyer

See also

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1992. Ezel checks the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace