|
TBA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
Trace the development of Tennessee's new ethics rules
When the Tennessee Supreme Court approved new Rules of Professional Conduct (TRPC) on August 27, 2002, it was the culmination of seven years of work on the revision of Tennessee's lawyer ethics rules led by the TBA's Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Hundreds of Tennessee attorneys and judges were involved in the process, offering comments, suggestions and revisions, and the Supreme Court spent almost two years soliciting and receiving comments, holding oral argument, and considering the proposed revisions.
The new rules — as amended through April 1, 2004 — are available in several formats on TBALink and can also be ordered in printed form.
To help you understand the development of the new rules, here's a brief record of the process along with filings and court orders.
TBA files petition with Tennessee Supreme Court
On October 9, 2000, after five years of study, consultation, and work, the Tennessee Bar Association filed with the Tennessee Supreme Court its petition seeking the adoption of a new, completely integrated set of lawyer ethics rules for Tennessee. These proposed rules are the product of the TBA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, formerly known as the Committee for the Study of Standards of Professional Conduct.
Since 1970, the conduct of Tennessee lawyers had been governed by ethics rules patterned after the 1969 American Bar Association Model Code of Professional Responsibility. The TBA’s proposed rules submitted now to the Supreme Court are patterned after the ABA’s 1983 Model Rules of Professional Conduct, versions of which have now been adopted in 44 American jurisdiction. The TBA’s proposed rules follow the ABA Model Rules, but include some modifications reflecting particular Tennessee practices, statutory law, and established decisions.
The TBA asked the Tennessee Supreme Court to publish its proposed rules to the bench, bar and public of Tennessee for a limited period to allow comment on them.
On April 18 and 26, 2002, the Tennessee Supreme Court entered orders setting oral argument for June 6, 2002, before the Court on thirteen specific issues raised by particular comments to the TBA's petition.
The TBA's petition, supporting memorandum, and proposed rules are set forth below, as is a copy of the Tennessee Supreme Court's April 18, 2002, order and April 26, 2002, order.
Tennessee Supreme Court seeks comments on proposed rules
Tennessee Supreme Court adopts new Rules of Professional Conduct
On August 27, 2002, the Tennessee Supreme Court approved new Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct (TRPC) for attorneys practicing in this state.
The new rules — amended slightly by the Court on Sept. 17 — went into effect March 1, 2003.
Orders implementing Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct
Access Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct (As amended through May 14, 2003)
Court adopts amendments from TBA, Tennessee Bar Foundation
The Tennessee Supreme Court on May 14, 2003, granted the Tennessee Bar Foundation's petition for changes to Rule 43 concerning IOLTA. These changes take effect immediately.
The Tennessee Supreme Court on April 29, 2003, granted the TBA's petition for reconsideration on several issues relating to the new Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct. Included in the changes:
Secret Taping: The Supreme Court reversed direction on secret taping by lawyers, following the most recent guidance from the ABA in its Formal Opinion 01-422 (2001). That guidance says that there is nothing inherently deceitful or deceptive in a lawyer secretly taping another person, and that is does not violate Rule 8.4(c) to do so. This is the position the TBA took in its original petition seeking the adoption of the Rules.
Surveillance: In handling secret taping, the Court repealed language in the same Comment that led many to believe that ordinary surveillance would be unethical.
The "Not Certified" Practice-Area Disclaimer": The Supreme Court also reversed direction on practice-area disclaimers, deleting the requirement for the "not certified" disclaimers from Rule 7.4. The Court's original enactment of new Rule 7.4 carried forward the existing Tennessee disclaimer regime. The position now adopted by the Court, deleting the requirement of a "not certified" disclaimer whenever a practice area is mentioned, was the TBA position in its original petition to the Court seeking adoption of the new Rules.
Other changes: The Court also approved several other minor, technical amendments. On one issue — the restoration of a comment to Rule 4.1 on confidentiality — the Court thought that the proposal was substantive and asked for further briefing.
|
|
