ABA-511
|
| (Absent a client’s informed consent, a lawyer hoping to “obtain assistance in a representation from other lawyers on a listserv discussion group, or post a comment,” may not provide any information “relating to a representation” – even in hypothetical or abstract form – if there is a reasonable likelihood that the lawyer’s posts would allow a reader then or later to infer the identity of the lawyer’s client or the particular situation involved.” Lawyers should remember that Rule 1.6’s breadth prohibits a lawyer from revealing “even publicly available information, such as transcripts or proceedings in which the lawyer represented a client” or even “the identity of a lawyer’s clients.” The breadth of this duty means that “lawyers are generally restricted from disclosing such information even if the information is anonymized, hypothetical, or in abstracted form if it is reasonably likely that someone learning the information might then or later ascertain the client’s identity or the situation involved.” Lawyers may be impliedly authorized to disclose such information within a law firm, but not outside the law firm. Earlier ABA LEO 411 (1998) involved disclosing anonymized information to “an attorney known to the consulting lawyer.” Such an implied authorization does not apply if a lawyer communicates “to a wider group of lawyers by posting an inquiry or comment on a listserv.” When dealing with such widespread communications, a lawyer “should err on the side of caution and avoid specific hypotheticals, refrain from posting, or obtain the client’s informed consent if there is any reasonable concern.” |