Ethics Opinon 1983-10
I
QUESTION PRESENTED
What
is the duty of the attorney for a guardian/conservator/personal
representative or other fiduciary who will not prepare an
accounting and may have converted assets to his own use?
II
CONCLUSION
When
confronted with a client who, as a fiduciary, fails to perform
his duties or acts improperly, the attorney should urge
his client to file a true and accurate accounting disclosing
the true facts. If the client refuses to file a true and
accurate account, the attorney is prohibited from disclosing
any information that would be likely to be detrimental to
the client. However, the attorney must refuse to file a
knowingly false or misleading account. Further, rules pertaining
to mandatory or permissive withdrawal from the case may
apply, and under all circumstances, the attorney must refrain
from any aiding or assisting of the fiduciary-client in
his improper acts.
III
DISCUSSION
Various
sections of the Probate Code (§§ 922, 1025.5,
2620) require regular accountings to be filed by fiduciaries
in probate matters. As a practical matter, in San Diego
County, the only persons who are in a position to be aware
of the failure to file a timely accounting are:
1.
The fiduciary.
2. The beneficiary/ward/conservatee.
3. The attorney for the fiduciary.
4. The surety for the fiduciary, if any.
If the
fiduciary is unwilling to make a true and accurate accounting,
the beneficiary/ward/conservatee is incapable of monitoring
the fiduciary. If there is no surety, then only the attorney
may be aware of the misfeasance/malfeasance of the fiduciary.
The
attorney may not divulge to anyone the improper conduct
of his client learned within the scope of the attorney-client
privilege.
Business
& Professions Code, Section 6068 provides:
"It
is the duty of an attorney:
. .
.
"(e) to maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every
peril to himself to preserve the secrets, of his client."
Nevertheless,
the situation considered here may, under some circumstances,
be one of those set forth in Rule 2-111(B), Rules of Professional
Conduct, which makes mandatory the withdrawal of the attorney:
"(B)
Mandatory Withdrawal.
"A
member of the State Bar Association representing a client
before a tribunal, with its permission if required by its
rules, shall withdraw from employment . . . if:
"(1)
He knows or should know that his client is bringing a legal
action, conducting a defense, asserting a position in litigation
or otherwise having steps taken for him solely for the purpose
of harassing or maliciously injuring any person or solely
out of spite, or if taking or prosecuting an appeal merely
for delay, or for any reason not in good faith; or
"(2)
He knows or should know that his continued employment will
result in violation of these Rules of Professional Conduct
or of the State Bar Act; or
"(3)
His mental or physical condition renders it unreasonably
difficult for him to carry out the employment effectively."
On the
other hand, in some situations involving defalcations, withdrawal
may be permissive but not mandatory. Rule 2-111(C) permits
the withdrawal of the attorney when:
"(1)
His client:
. .
.
"(b) Personally seeks to pursue an illegal course of
conduct.
. . .
"(d) Other course of conduct renders it unreasonably
difficult for the member of the State Bar to carry out his
employment effectively."
Therefore,
in cases governed by 2-111(B), the attorney must withdraw.
In cases governed by 2-111(C), withdrawal is permissive
but not mandatory. When confronted with a client who is
defalcating, the attorney should seriously consider which
of these rules may apply to his particular situation, and
should also consider the possible desirability of withdrawal.
San
Diego County Probate Rule 18.1 requires that a withdrawing
attorney file a motion or petition with the court and, at
that time, have a citation issued directing the representative
to appear and show cause why the petition should not be
granted or, why the representative has not taken the proper
steps to complete his or her duties. The issuance of a citation
to the client, pursuant to local rule, at the request of
the attorney, invites the attention of the Court to the
wrongdoing of the client. Thus, the attorney should consider
ways to minimize the detrimental effect of this rule, such
as by securing a voluntary appearance by the representative.
The
Committee on Legal Ethics of the Los Angeles County Bar
Association has considered similar questions on several
occasions. In their Opinion 267 (January 26, 1960) they
concluded that an attorney is under no obligation, and may
not, call to the attention of the Court the fact that a
guardian was misappropriating funds. The committee advised
the attorney to urge the client to file a true accounting
and, if she refused, the attorney had to refuse to file
any account.
Opinion
274 (October 25, 1962) of the LA County Bar Ethics Committee
opined that after being substituted out as attorney for
administrator, the attorney had no ethical obligation to
disclose defalcations of the administrator to the Court,
the heirs, the District Attorney, the State Bar, or to the
administrator's new attorney.
Finally,
in Opinion 386 the committee considered the duty of a client's
attorney to disclose information of an alleged perjury by
the client during earlier proceedings. The committee voiced
the opinion that B&P Code § 6068 prohibits the
attorney from disclosing information, gained in the professional
relationship, which would be detrimental to the client.
Disclaimer:
This opinion was issued by the Legal Ethics Committee of
the San Diego County Bar Association. It is advisory only
and is not binding upon any member of the SDCBA, any other
member of the State Bar of California, the State Bar of
California or its Board of Governors, or any persons or
tribunals charged with regulatory responsibilities. The
SDCBA, its officers, directors, agents, and the Legal Ethics
Committee members assume no responsibility or liability
in rendering this opinion.
|