If a letter from opposing counsel contains a secret about another of that lawyer's clients, can you forward it to your own client?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1998. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The inquiry concerned correspondence between lawyers that contained information about more than one client. The committee first noted that it is not its function to issue opinions about the conduct of lawyers other than the inquiring lawyer.
Turning to the inquiring lawyer's own duties, the committee stated that RPC 1.6 sets forth a lawyer's duty to protect client confidences and secrets, and that the identity of a lawyer's client is ordinarily not privileged information, citing Dietz v. Doe and Seventh Elect Church v. Rogers. The committee concluded that to the extent the lawyer wishes to pass an opposing lawyer's letter on to the client and believes the letter contains information about another client that would qualify as a "secret" under RPC 1.6, the lawyer should redact that information from the copy of the letter sent to the client.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1998, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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. Washington's confidentiality rule was then framed in terms of a client's "confidences and secrets"; current RPC 1.6 corresponds to ABA Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information), which protects "information relating to the representation."
Common questions
Q: Can a lawyer forward opposing counsel's letter that contains a secret about another client?
A: The committee concluded the lawyer should redact information that would qualify as another client's "secret" under RPC 1.6 from the copy sent to the lawyer's own client.
Q: Is a client's identity confidential?
A: The committee stated that the identity of a lawyer's client is ordinarily not privileged information, citing Dietz v. Doe and Seventh Elect Church v. Rogers.
Q: Would the committee address the other lawyer's conduct?
A: No. The committee stated it is not its function to issue opinions about the conduct of lawyers other than the inquiring lawyer.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied Washington RPC 1.6 (protection of a client's confidences and secrets), corresponding to ABA Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information). The committee distinguished a client's identity (ordinarily not privileged) from information that qualifies as a "secret" under RPC 1.6, and made the duty to redact turn on whether the forwarded letter contained such a secret about another client.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- ABA Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information); Washington RPC 1.6
Cases:
- Dietz v. Doe, 131 Wn.2d 835, 846, 935 P.2d 611 (1997), cited that a client's identity is ordinarily not privileged.
- Seventh Elect Church v. Rogers, 102 Wn.2d 527, 531, 688 P.2d 506 (1984), cited that a client's identity is ordinarily not privileged.
See also
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1006
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Advisory Opinion: 1813
Year Issued: 1998
RPC(s): RPC 1.6
Subject: Client confidence or secret; letter from lawyer containing information about more than one client
The Committee researched and reviewed your inquiry concerning the correspondence between lawyers containing information about more than one client and determined the following:
It is not the function of the Committee to issue opinions about the conduct of lawyers other than the inquiring lawyer. RPC l.6 sets forth a lawyer's duty to protect client confidences and secrets. Ordinarily, the identity of a lawyer's client is not privileged information. See Dietz v. Doe, 131 Wn. 2d 835, 846, 935 P.2d 611 (1997); Seventh Elect Church v. Rogers, 1102 Wn. 2d 527, 531, 688 P.2d 506 (1984). To the extent that you wish to pass your opposing lawyer's letter on to your client and you believe that the letter contains information about another client which would qualify as a "secret" under RPC 1.6, then you should redact the information from the copy of the letter you send to your client.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1998 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.