If a former client is spreading false statements about the firm, can the lawyer reveal the client's confidences to respond?

Plain-English summary

The committee addressed a situation where a former client was "apparently maligning" the lawyer's law firm to third parties. It concluded that Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct would not permit the lawyer to reveal confidences or secrets of that client.

The committee then identified a response the lawyer could make without violating that rule. The lawyer could write a letter to the former client merely stating that what the client is saying is false and directing the former client to stop. That letter could be sent to others, the committee said, because no client confidences or secrets would be involved.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. RPC 1.6 on confidentiality, including its self-defense provisions, was later renumbered and amended. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer reveal a former client's confidences to rebut the client's false statements?

A: No. The committee concluded that, where a former client was apparently maligning the firm to third parties, RPC 1.6 would not permit the lawyer to reveal that client's confidences or secrets.

Q: Can the lawyer respond to the false statements at all?

A: Yes. The committee said the lawyer could write a letter to the former client merely stating that what the client is saying is false and directing the client to stop.

Q: Can that rebuttal letter be shown to the third parties who heard the statements?

A: The committee said the letter could be sent to others because no client confidences or secrets would be involved.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Washington RPC 1.6 as it stood in 1986, the confidentiality rule (corresponding to Model Rule 1.6). The committee applied it to a former client maligning the firm, drawing a line between revealing the client's confidences or secrets (not permitted) and sending a letter that contains no confidences and simply denies the statements and asks the client to stop (permitted).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Washington RPC 1.6 (confidentiality of information), corresponding to Model Rule 1.6.

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 496: responding to a former client's online criticism
• WSBA Ethics Op. 1006: client confidences and an error in a sentencing court order
• WSBA Ethics Op. 950: representation adverse to a former client in unrelated litigation

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=76

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Advisory Opinion: 965
Year Issued: 1986
RPC(s): RPC 1.6
Subject: Client confidences; client maligning former attorney

The Committee was of the opinion that in your situation where a former client is "apparently maligning" your law firm to third parties, Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct would not permit you to reveal confidences or secrets of that client. However, the Committee further was of the opinion that you could write a letter to the former client merely stating that what the client is saying about you is false and directing the former client to stop. That letter could be sent to others because no client confidences or secrets would be involved.